Dej

Nice one. Let us hope that 'Jasta Olham' (or should that be 'Olham atsaJ') brings many recruits to the skies 'Over Flanders Fields'

Thought it was only mildly amusing until the last line... seriously cracked me up, fortunately I'd put my cup of tea down already.

You mean twin Lewis, WM It's a Sopwith Camel "Comic" Night fighter Pilot seat moved to rear. The twin Vickers guns were replaced with two Lewis guns firing forward over the top wing on Foster mountings. Served with Home Defence Squadrons against German air raids. The "Comic" nickname was of course unofficial (according to some, but... see below) and was shared with the night fighter version of the Sopwith 1½ Strutter, see below 1½ Strutter "Comic" Captain F.W. Honnett, Flight Commander of "A" Flight No. 78 Sqn (HD) RFC, suggested a modification of one of the 1½ Strutters by moving the pilot's seat and all the controls into the observer's position, his argument being poor visibility from the regular pilot's seat. The original pilot's position was faired over, and the plane was equipped with a night searchlight. The first three 1½ Strutters modified to the new standard by the Southern Aircraft Repair Depot joined 78 Sqn in September 1917. During the night raid over London on the night of October 31st/November 1st 1917 they opposed twenty-two enemy Gothas. 78 Sqn pilots dubbed this unusual plane the 'Comic fighter'. Initially the armament of this aircraft consisted of only a single course Vickers gun; later Comics were equipped with a Lewis gun on a flexible Foster mounting. It should be also mentioned that at least one aircraft, namely B762, had two Lewises on a special fixed mounting and could fire at a 70° angle. 1½ Strutter Comics were intensively used by 78 Sqn until February 1918, flying night intercept missions against Gothas and Giant R-planes. Due to the poor performance of this type, it was never put into series production. At the beginning of 1918 the night fighter version of the famous Sopwith Camel (which ironically received the official name Sopwith Comic) replaced the 1½ Strutter Comic and other obsolete night-fighters in many Home Defence units.

An attempt to illustrate what I mean. Severely hampered by not having it in layers nor loads of time. But, I selected the SE as well as I could then filled the selection with white on a new layer over the main image. Threw in a black layer below it so I could observe the 'white SE' clearly. Applied a Radius 5 Gaussian Blur to the 'white SE' and set it to an Overlay Blend at 15 Opacity. Turned off the black layer. Dropped to the main layer and increased the Contrast by 15 to simulate a Sharpen on the SE layer that WM will have. It kinda shows what I mean on the SE but of course the DFW's now borked... although the flames look fiercer... betraying my bloodlust too! Hope you don't mind, WM. It's just such a powerful image and really good composition I want to help make it even better (sounds conceited and I don't pretend to be a graphics artist - just trying to help)

Well the lighting repays the effort you put in, definitely works. I agree with Hauksbee, I think one can achieve all one needs with either Soften or Layer Blend effects. As to the sharper focus I agree with you about the choice but for me the SE5 is a just a little too flat. What might work, given the lighting, is if you can somehow get a very, very slight glow on the edges of the left wings, fading away to the right. Not sure how you'd do it, negative image of a edge trace layer, fade-erased and then a hard light layer blend perhaps? Then again, that might not work at all. But most of the fun is in the experimenting, for me anyway.

That's one of your best yet WM, IMO. I think the SE shoud be sharper but the light is on the correct side and the DFW looks very good... powerful stuff. Have to feel for the DFW crew - 'ganz gebrannt'. Could you tone the fire down though and have as effective an image? Probably not.

I've played a number of different pilots in campaign missions since this issue came up. I find it difficult to stay with A flight now, which is bad, but am usually above any EA encountered, which is a welcome change. The one bomber escort so far we were a long way from 'em, not truly sure about our altitude respective to theirs. On my last mission A Flight were well ahead and above ours about halfway to our objective, when some bogeys passed at distance. Next thing, A Flight comes tearing past us to go mix it up with the EAs. Lord alone knows how they spotted 'em.

Frightfully bad form to quote oneself, I know. But Lou's on to us I just know that the next Wild Card will be the equivalent of the underside of an SE5 rudder bar that I predicted earlier. I think we're in for a tough last few rounds, gentlemen. We've shown our unimprovéd mettle, like young Fortinbras, and Louvert will test it to the full.

I totally agree, BH. It's good in one way that classical music is popularised in adverts and film but bad that it become clichéd as a result. I feel the same you do about Dies Irae, about that other 'famous' Latin piece 'O Fortuna'. IMO Orff showed real genius in setting relatively obscure Latin texts to some incredible music... but you'd never have a glimpse of it from film and TV. And I agree that Mozart never put a foot wrong musically. Still not my favourite composer though, Vaughan Williams has that accolade, the Tallis Fantasia is what music exists for.

It does indeed. I confess I listened to the music as much as watched the video, except for that recovery from the same spin that's killed me more often than I'd like, which grabbed my complete attention. There were a couple of other scenes where the Camel looked like she was was on the edge of that signature flick over and the video transitioned to a different view. I couldn't tell whether you'd recovered or had switched to a different clip... a sign of a well-made video I'd say.

Well done, RC. I was a 45 minute car journey from posting the exact same answer. Dashed through the door straight to my PC and you'd nailed it already. Now I'm going to have to lug 'The Complete Book of Fighters' into work as well as an over-stuffed laptop case and general hapsy-flapsy bag... not that I'm taking this competition seriously, mind.

Bloody Excellent, Lou! That 'death spin' recovery you may justly be proud of, especially from outside the cockpit! Jetzt kennt Kempf dich noch! Oh, and I like the Mozart 40 too, although I'd personally have gone for the Lacrimosa or Dies Irae from the Requiem, clichéd though it be.

Very nice image, WM, very evocative. I'd agree with Hauksbee, though, about the extra Alb. The eye naturally follows the Newps around and into the centre of the image - excellent composition there. The lefthand Alb jars and drags the eye away. I think you could lose it with no adverse effect at all. I don't personally think there's too much light on the foreground Newp, but you might want to colour the light a bit to pick up the ambient colour of the background. There's also something unfortunate happening with the image bottomost right unless that's just me.

Nieuport Monoplane, around October 1917. Strictly speaking the photo illustrates the second prototype Nieuport monoplane fighter which was under development when the first prototype was flown sometime end 1917 or early 1918. The first protoype was powered by a 150hp Gnome Monosoupape 9N rotary and the machine in the photo powered by a 180hp Le Rhone 9R. However, as of May 1918 the Monosupape powered protoype was still under test and the Le Rhone protoype was abandoned. In the end the prototype was not accepted, but formed the first Nieuport application of the configuration later greatly refined as the Nieuport 31. I think it within the rules to edit this as no one has posted after me. My original source 'The Complete Book of Fighters' refers to it as a 'Nieuport Monoplane' and gives the information above. However, elsewhere it seems to be referred to as the 'Nieuport-Delage Madon' or 'Nieuport Madon' so for completeness I'm adding this paragraph. Another photo of it here:

Awesome. That is very, very useful indeed. Thanks.

The OP was asking about hammerheads in the Camel. My experience is to do anything you can, however ungraceful and uncoordinated, to avoid the tail slipping back. I fly with a twisty stick (X52) and have found that if I pull her slightly over the vertical with full right rudder as I cut throttle then use the ailerons to nudge her straight she achieves the desired result... nearly. Probably looks absolutely bloody awful from the outside but WWI ain't about pretty flying.

Tut. Not really good enough is it? I expected full integration with Microsoft Train Simulator by Phase 3 and here you are offering a paltry uplift to the Railyard graphics. I want my money back. I was really looking forward to to the adrenaline rush of driving a train full of munitions though a Railyard under attack from the air but all I get to do is fly chuffin' planes. 'Over Flanders Fields' my a**, you can't go over Flanders fields, you can only fly above them! Umpteen patches in and you stil haven't got the core game right!

I'm grateful for for the information Olham and and touched by the gesture... and the content of PMs from others too. But this is getting far too friendly, it's a competition, dammit! Play to win chaps, I've had my turn at bat, three cheers for the next man up. If anyone's holding back because they think I have some kind of 'droit de seigneur' over the answer to #38, DON'T.

Well, Dowding was CO of No. 16 Sqn. from 1915 until he clashed with Trenchard following the Battle of the Somme and was sent home. Dowding's nickname was 'Stuffy'. Those two things together strongly imply the same bloke.

Very kind of you both, but if you look again at my post I failed to say which photo I was referring to. Correcting that oversight would have taken more time so it's quite right that Olham's post be accepted and mine be considered to be too late. I believe I DO know precisely what #38 is and yes, 36 hours is a wait, but rules is rules. C'est la guerre.

I went for the nearest to what I'd suggest, which is to subdivide by specific model and type and then by ace/jasta. I'm hoping that thereby one could home in on a very specific skin but also loosen the criteria to find all skins for a specific model/type.

Thanks Lou. And Olham too. But I'll wait the 36 hours as per the rules from the start. Olham pipped me by a less than a minute but that's fair and within the rules. Besides, it gave me the best laugh I've had all week when I hit the POST button and saw the bottom of Olham's post on the same pic. ROTFL, honest!

This particular aircraft is: A Swedish Phönixwerke Phönix 122 D.III The type entered service with the army in 1919, was retired from the air force, where it was designated J 1, in 1932. A total of twelve served with the Swedish armed forces. Built in 1919, military serial 947. However, in general it's a development of the Phönix D.I which was the second design developed by the Phönix Flugzeug-Werke based on Hansa-Brandenburg designs which it produced under licence.The D.I was a single-seat biplane fighter with improvements over the original Hansa-Brandenburg design which included more efficient wings, a more powerful engine and structural improvements.A prototype was first flown in 1917 and proved to be fast but difficult to handle but because of the urgent need for fighters the D.I entered production. To improve the problems a modified variant, the D.II was introduced with balanced elevators and balanced ailerons on the upper wings. Then a further development was the D.III which is what we have here, which had balanced ailerons on both wings and a more powerful 230hp (172kW) Hiero in-line engine. Drat! ROFTL! we must have been typing at the same time.

Damn! Tough week at work, get to Friday night and I still can't relax! LOL! Welcome back Lou. Good luck everyone.

That IS interesting. My observation to Ryan H is his thread is probably incorrect, then. I haven't been working many capaigns since the post-superpatch updates and was going from memory. I shall give it a try tonight and see if I see the same thing.