Wels

Hello, most planes being the "natural prey of the E.III" are not yet modelled in OFF p3. Most planes downed with the E.III, the Halberstadt D.II, the early Pfalz monoplanes and the Fokker D.II biplanes, were the so-called X-wires ("Gitterschwaenze" in german) of the early Farman types. But you can shoot down B.E.2cs, all other planes in OFF are (almost) impossible to down with an E.III. I do now shoot down 1 1/2 strutters now and then, but you have to get in fast from above, no chance otherwise. To engage a Nieuport is of no use in OFF, no chance. When you manage your engine right (only OFF, not reality because the Oberursel engine could not be adapted to higher altitudes) your E.III will be a slight bit faster than a BE2c, and you will finally come close enough. But you have to lean your mixture according to the altitude you fly - again, not so in reality, the E.III was always faster than the B.E.2s without engine management. Greetings, Catfish

Hello Lou, you wrote: " .. the Alb is one of the few reasons I would sneak across the mud to fly with the Huns. That, and their beer...and Heidi Klum. .." Maybe we meet in the middle of no man's land in the mud, me sneaking across for a Bristol fighter .. I would almost prefer czech beer, instead of german. Heidi Klum, well .... Greetings, Catfish

Hello, well, the question is in the topic title .. i downloaded a Blériot 11 and "installed" it - means the install program searched for the CFS3 folder, which was not there - so i said "yes" to create the folder. So afterwards there was the usual folder to be found...programs\CFS3\aircraft\Bleriot11. Since i found the "aircraft" folder in the "CFSWW1 Over Flanders Fields" one, i just copied the Blériot11 folder into the OFF "aircraft" one. I also saw there were three different folders under the usual OFF planes, so i created those three folders (only 2, the "sound" one was already present) below the bleriot11 one, and copied the appropriate files into those: "bleriot11.m3d" and "bleriot11_cockpito.m3d" into the "models" folder "bleriot11_CFS3_c.dds", "bleriot11_CFS3_t.dds" and "prop_OFF_dr1.dds" into the "textures" folder Somehow the Bleriot does not show up after starting OFF - ist it even possible to get this working, and if what would i have to do ? Thanks and Happy Easter, Catfish

Hello Hauksbee, yes that is the button, but it is QC for Quick Combat - clicking at it and arriving at your aerodrome there is now a QC window with a medal on the left - clicking on it you are able to select different planes to fly, and the Bleriot will show up here. I guess this QC is is a remnant of CFS3, and not intended to be used in OFF phase 3, but i may be wrong ... "What a disappointment. Ah well. [but...how difficult would it be to disable the Bleriot and get the regular roster of British planes back?]" It is easy to remove the Bleriot from the list of "aircraft" folders in OFF phase 3, there was no editing of any other file and i doubt that it screwed up the rest of my installation - i will move the Bleriot folders, restart OFF and see what happens now under "british" in Quick combat. Maybe there was never showing anything up, because usually you play a Quick mission or flight from another OFF menu than "Workshop" ? Greetings, Catfish

Hello Widowmaker, it worked, however only from the workshop quick combat button, as you said (thanks!). And it only showed up under "British", and as the only british plane hmm. Anyway it was worth a try - fm and dm are virtually non-existant, you can dive with 200+ without any damage, and it is surely much more forgiving than the real thing - but fun it is ! Thanks, greetings and Happy Easter, Catfish

Hello, you wrote: Well i am still waiting for the E.III's special strength to show up lol , it has not even the 1000 shots it had in Phase 2 .. B.t.w. some photos from the Laatzen museum (sorry for the bad photos - only digital camera with a crappy flash, and light was bad for taking shots): Complete view a bit more close detail of landing gear showing the lever for the wing warping mechanism And a pre-war Moewe, quite a good plane for the time There's also the Eindecker from Hans Grade, a Nieuport, Dr.I etc. - if you're in Hannover the museum is worth a visit .. Greetings, Catfish

Hello, i have the fm switched to hard all the time, now i did fly the Pfalz D.IIIa for the first time, against a SPAD. I had two sudden stalls without any sign of "wobbling" first by the FF joystick, and the second stall killed my pilot. The spinning following the stalls looks very strange though, the plane turns heftily in every direction, with violent and unbelievable jerks, sometimes it even jumps upwards, until finally hitting the ground sooner or later. There is no chance to recover from this kind of "spinning" - don't know if it has anything to do with the 1.3 patch because i di not fly the Pfalz before ... The Dr.I, well i only tried that once (patch 1.28?), but i was able to perform some kind of flat half spin, e.g. bank slightly to the rigth, and apply almost full left rudder - that way you will be flying sideways for a short time. Flying almost backwards in tightening the turn like shown in one of the history channel videos does not work though, but i wonder the later Dr.I would have been able to do that - maybe Voss's F1 prototype ? Greetings, Catfish

Hello, found this in another forum lol: I wonder if we could do that, make a racing track and ... Greetings, Catfish

Hello, just some screenshots, in no particular order - but showing goodies and problems .. Nice planes ! Escorting Rolands with my Halberstadt. Nice cockpit view, only problem is my Halberstadt gets wet My flight really landed ! They do land, even if it takes time, they make a very loong leg for the last approach. Pilot or observer bailing out - but there's still someone left in the cockpit ? Damage of the wing looks good, i mean it's bad - nice damage modeling ! This Nieuport followed me for some hundred yards flying reverse (!) without losing altitude, shooting and hitting me all the time. Imagine hitting someone in a Nieuport flying reversed ?! Greetings, Catfish

Hello, great screenshots. Widowmaker this burning R.E.8 looks really bad , i guess i would indeed rather jump .. Greetings, Catfish

Hello 1. Which plane (exact type) did you fly mostly so far in BHaH? Unfortunately the E.III ... but it should have been an E.I in 1915 - or a Taube, or an early Pfalz monoplane. 2. Which Squadron, Escadrille or Jasta did you make your most flights in? Jasta 5, Jasta 12, Jasta 7 - not called Jasta at that time, but KEKs and the like. 3. What was your highest confirmed hits score? 17, all with the E.III. I died much quicker in the later crates, later in the war. 4. What were your most flight hours with one pilot? Forgot it, i deleted the pilot after he was killed in an accident. But i stayed with the Jasta appx. three months - I survived all kinds of crashes, damages etc. but then i rammed a windsock pole at my aerodrome with stopped engine, and a "speed" of some 2-5 km/h - boom, pilot dead - this is so UNFAIR or so i thought .. Greetings, Catfish

Hello PD, first nice to see you again ! I almost thought you would not show up again And second thanks for the missions ! Greetings, Catfish quote name='PD-1' date='Apr 7 2009, 06:08 AM' post='271971'] the wrong mission pac was uploaded. none of these will work in your install as all the aircraft are the modded ones for boys of 60 online. will resubmit soon. please accept my appologies for this mixup. PD

Hello, Not even Catfish go for every bait Greeting, Catfish

Hello, first sorry for my crappy english , seems i used the wrong words ... But an interesting discussion ! And Oops i meant consensus not consent (god!) , and i wanted to say that the dogfighting abilities of the SE5a were indeed bad - certainly in relation to agile rotary planes like the Nieuport, Tripe, Dr.I and the "D".VIII late-war Eindecker. For what i read from Jentsch and Udet, even the in-line motored Albatros was a better turner than the SE5. And yes, there is not one general view over at the aerodrome, of how the Dr.I flew, or better its prototype Voss was using, with a non-stock engine. "But, I think there is more than a bit of "National bias" in your views." National bias, hmm. I am much for letting the facts speak, as far as they are still available after almost a century of unintentional forgetting, and more-intentional propaganda. I indeed used to be more biased towards the allies, but after reading so much i realized those "allies" (so-called in WW2) were the "Entente" in WW1, and it was not so easy with the good and the bad guys in WW1. Again, not speaking of WW2 and this austrian guy and his 3rd Reich here. But in WW1 reading about England and France declaring war - just comparing the claims of "who started the war" does not match the dates at which things happened. After reading a new book about the U-boat war I wrote a lot about it in the aerodrome forum (books section). I also read biographies about Asquith and Churchill, and quoted those two politicians with parts of their speeches held before the war - i was instantly called revanchistic. Next came the german atrocities of german soldiers killing belgian babies carrying them around on their bayonets and crucifying canadian soldiers (the Zeppelins were also called "baby killers" on the british propaganda posters). There are two major sites on the web that deal with those assumptions, and it becomes clear that those "witnessed" atrocities are indeed propaganda. But i was really shocked to see lots of especially australian forumites still believed this. So ... I do sometimes miss the historic distance, and level of information - nevermind. "When you say: "A look at the wing's profile of the SE5a instantly reveals that the SE5a only climbed well with sufficient speed. Being slow and out of energy it became hard to manoueuver and unable to climb at all." Isn't that true of EVERY fighter?" Yes, but there were two schools of how to build wings, and most designers preferred low, sleek profiles because they thought the plane would be faster - not necessarily true. Ok, the SPAD and the SE5s with their thin wings WERE fast, but they had power plants built into their airframes that would have made a wardrobe fly. Two planes of same power and fuselage would see a high-profile winged one be faster. They have posted quite some computer calculations which also show the german Dreidecker would not have needed the third wing, indeed it spoiled the airflow badly. The climbing abilities of the Dr.I (guess the prototype of the Dr.I, called "F.I" or "V4" with the stronger rotary was even better than the later Dr. series plane) were due to the wings profiles, NOT its three (!) wings - this was only true for the Sopwith tripe which had three wings with thin profiles and climbed well because it had three of them. The Dr. I with its three high-profile wings would have climbed as well with two of them, and the drag would have also been reduced as a side-effect. And even the final Dr.I was not a slow plane even with 3 wings - tables range from 150 km/h to 193 km/h - a variation from appx. 90 to 120+ mph. Indeed the construction of the very first Fokker Dreidecker saw the plane without any struts, and it was only because of the pilot's interfering that they were finally added. The early Dr.I's wings breaking off under stress had nothing to do with those struts, but braking stringers of poor quality, and moisture within the wings. The later Fokker Eindecker "D".VIII proved them all wrong. Apart from the fact that Germany indeed wanted a plane to cope with the Sopwith tripe, the Fokker Dreidecker is construction-wise a completely different plane. At least that is what i tought i learned from books and hundreds of discussions at the aerodrome lol. "Perhaps you're just talking about "turn and burn" fighters. The SE5a was an "energy fighter" or a "boom and zoom" fighter. Obviously, it couldn't follow a very agile DR1 through a series of turns but it didn't need to. Once he started bleeding off energy, the pilot broke off and extended and climbed for altitude and the DR1 was left far behind. When the SE5a came back, it had a significant energy advantage while the DR1 was at a serious disadvantage." I agree to some 90 percent , however the SE5 has only an advantage if the Dr does not evade the line of fire - what it easily would have done if the pilot saw the SE5 coming. The onstorming SE5 would not be able to correct its flight and bullets against a fast turning and jumping plane of any kind. The Dr.I is a virtually (right word?) unstable plane, and Voss and the later pilots used this feature as an advantage. Additionally if i would encounter 5 SE5as that are already near below or at same altitude, i would not run away in a straight line trying to gain altitude, but circle around an imaginary pole while climbing. But (try to) run away, i would .. "The proof probably is that only about 320 DR1s were built while more than 5,000 Camels and 5,000 SE5as were manufactured. By mid-1918 the DR1 was obsolete and with all of its structural problems it probably was doomed from the start. But, yes, it certainly was the most nimble late war "turn and burn" fighter. But that wasn't worth much." I'd say i agree to even more than 99 percent here Greetings, Catfish

Hello, i don't want to spoil the party, however in the aerodrome forum there is anything else than a consent on the Dr.I abilities. Especially Voss' decision to get involved with the 5 SE5as is alway viewed from different angles. The usual agreement is that Voss decided to take on the fight rather than just climbing away, and escape. The question coming up again and agin is why he did it. The abilities of the SE5a in a dogfight are next to none, almost every other Entente scout was better in that respect, the main advantage was it was cheap to produce and easy to fly. The problem in WW1 as WW2 was not scarcity of planes, but of pilots. Everyone seemed to be instantly able to fly the stable and forgiving SE5a without much training, and it was thus the "perfect" plane for beginners, and still good enough for experienced pilots. A look at the wing's profile of the SE5a instantly reveals that the SE5a only climbed well with sufficient speed. Being slow and out of energy it became hard to manoueuver and unable to climb at all. The Dr.I is completely different, while it was not particularly slow with its 160 km/h in level flight at 2000 meters its thick wing profiles, derived from wind tunnel tests in the city of Goettingen, made it a good climber - the only backdraw here was its third wing and the struts, building up too juch drag and reducing max. airspeed. A Fokker with this profile and better aerodynamics was the D.VII and VIII, and almost all following planes. Greetings, Catfish

Hello Olham, we just made a short bicycle tour (MS bicycle simulator 9.0 with the new mod and TrackIR is soo immersive lol). I am with the Halberstadt - i think there are no separate models for the D.II or .III, but offficially it is the II, october 1916 with Jasta 5 (not yet named J5, but KEK irgendetwas). I have to be very close to hit, otherwise i need the tracers to show the line of fire, and thus waste a lot of ammo just for getting the aim right. As well the bird is really jumpy, i need a very smooth hand to keep anything in the gunsight. And to make things worse there IS no gunsight .. S! J5_Wels

Hello Mk2, thanks a lot for sharing some of your phantastic collection ! Thanks and greetings, Catfish

Hello Gimpy, yes you are right, however they will perfectly fly in P3 also. The Jenny made solely for CFS3 along with the Fokker E.IV and the Brisfit for CFS3 do as well - only their flight model is not as refined as with the native OFF planes. The Zeppelin will also fly, or so i hope - maybe the OFF team will have an own one at some point of development. Greetings, Catfish/Wels/Kai

Hello Stumpy, sure i would like to test-fly it ! Do not listen to Olham, he has become fixated on his Albatros planes lol. Please upload it ! And ... do you know where the Zeppelin alone can be downloaded ? Thanks and greetings, Catfish P.S. If i only had an Etrich "Taube"

Hallo Olham, "Schadenfreude ist die schönste Freude, weil sie von Herzen kommt" Naja, nicht wirklich lol Catfish

Hello, @CaptSopwith: " ... Looks like SH3 is quite a good sim. Not to get too far off topic but, does it run under Vista? ..." Should be no problem with Vista, however make sure to download the most recent GWX "supermod" organized by Lehmann - this turns SH3 into the best sim that ever was - certainly better than SH4, but also than almost all sims i have seen yet. There's also the "NYGM" ("Not your grandmother's mod") by Teddy bear, which is also good, but it is up to you .. There are life rafts, debris, oil slicks, vicious destroyers and corvettes and you learn a lot about Sonar and evading it later in the war. There is harbour traffic, air patrols, all kinds of different ships and U-boat types even with the "U-boat-AA-traps" . But it is not easy to hit with a torpedo, as well as surviving later in the war. There are different camera positions to observe and make screenshots from, all via mouse. I had tons of screenshots, in fact i found myself just standing on the bridge and staring at waves and sky for hours - the original sim ("vanilla version") made by the romanian dev team was already great, and playable out-of-the-box, but with those mods - unbelievable. It is definitely worth it. If you really get it be sure to play the "school" missions, that gives you a hint of what to expect .. you have to learn a lot. Since i have some experience from my navy days, and sailing i still found this convincing in any respect. Thanks and greetings, Catfish

Hello, another nice video, the vicious mgs are very good to see here in flight, second half of the vid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32UIIEdkYUU...feature=related Can anyone explain what this lorry with the steel-axle joining with the propellor centre of the static Brisfit, is for ? Thanks and greetings, Catfish

Hell, not french, excusez-moi ... But welcome to the forum. There are a lot of french people at the aerodrome forum, but i do not know how much there are here - hopefully the number will increase :yes: - anyone here ? Mais j'ai aussi de deux questions: "Liaxelot" c'est un nom, où est-ce que c'est une description - et pour quoi ? "mais chaud chaud les marrons !" Le AI c'est "chaud" comme des marrons - ca (où il ya le cédille?) veux dire c'est terrible ? Tu écrivais: "la fréquences des missions : même en lite, çà fait une par jour" Peut-être des 1-3 par jour, dépends sur la fréquence choisi au workshop (activité) je crois. "le taux de progression des grades : mon meilleur pilote qui a tenu 2 mois est passé de caporal a capitaine en même pas 1 mois (en 24 missions pour être exact !)" C'est trop vite la promotion ? Je ne sais pas .. "la fréquence de présence d'ennemis en vol : ce meilleur pilote a tenu 2 mois car jamais rencontre un seul avion ennemie ? (1 victoire sur un ballon et abattu par la DCA) pourtant dans le menu config j'ai mis ennemi air activité sur high et ou peut on modifier le nombre d'avions dans chaque groupe de vol car dans certains secteurs (Verdun par ex) a chaque rencontre je tombe sur des escadrilles de 6 a 8 adversaires alors que mon propre groupe est de trois ou au mieux de six (mais séparé !) la, tenir trois jours d'affiliés au front relève de l'exploit !" C'est bien possible de ne pas renconter un seul enemi pour longtemps, où tout-à coup des masses d'ennemis - ca dépends sur la location, et le temps .. je crois on ne peut pas changer le nombre d'avions dans ta groupe, ou cel des ennemis, ce sont seulement les numéros des avions et activités générales qui peuvent êtres changées. Mais encore ca dépends sur des numéros réales, où c'est que Winder a dit. " en facile, en une semaine je suis a 20 victoires (34 déclarées !) pas intéressant . un compromis n'est pas possible sauf a diminuer le nombre d'adversaires croisés a chaque mission (ce qui serait réaliste, je doute que même au plus fort de la bataille, chaque jours des dizaines d'avions ce croisaient dans les cieux, enfin je pense surtout début 1916, non ?) Je joue aussi aux ajustages de plus de difficulté, mais mon pilote ne survie ca en plus de deux semaines. Je crois les acitivitées aériennes augmentaient fortement après la deuxième moitié de 1916 (?) Pardon mon francais s'il vous plaît Au revoir, (où qu'est-ce qu'on dit au l'internet?) Catfish

Hello, LMAO hehe Ahem thanks all for the input, the claim game is after all a very good idea, and i certainly can live with it, maybe my post was taken too seriously lol. I will have to put a after every sentence to be understood, maybe this german humour lol Have a nice weekend, Catfish

Hello, we're in good company lol. I remember when SH3 came out, some people tried to patrol with their boat in real-time, one went so far as to hold out for 5 months (in the "atlantic") sleeping only when the boat was submerged, and regularly being woken up by a clock to control boat and possible contacts. He even made it into the newspapers, but he also lost his job lol. One proposed a device called "dial-a-shtink" to get the right immersion - you could choose Diesel smell, hot engine oil, farts, 5-month-old clothes and stale and moist surroundings. Additionally you couild empty a bucket of ice-cold salt water over your head, do not change clothes, run downstairs into the cellar as soon as the alarm bell rings, and greet all incoming telephone calls with "Jawohl Herr Doenitz !" Be careful with immersion, this can get smelly, i am sure he also did not shave, or bath Greetings, Catfish P.S But SH3 IS immersive ...