Hauksbee

Certainly seems promising. I'd buy a copy just to support the project. It's been sad watching a beautiful flight sim like ROF slowly die from neglect. 2x My 'cup of tea' seeing as I've always been a Quick Combat pilot. Never have flown Campaigns.

Need to get out more? No doubt, I do...much good it may do me. I realize there are vast stretches of this site that are Terra Incognita to me. I've just hung out at OFF. In browsing the links you posted in reply, I noted one reply to Menrva (I think I have that right) that you are keeping abreast of current software and security. That can only be a good thing. Also I see many site members saying many improvements and better site functioning. More of a good thing, tho' invisible to my constricted field of view. I've always felt that Combat Ace functioned just fine. You mentioned a few times that new skins will have to wait on more pressing business. Is there any chance that we at Over Flanders Fields can have our old skin back?

AirCo DH.10 (Amiens) Twin-Engine Medium Biplane Bomber Aircraft Just under 260 examples of the Airco DH.10 were completed in all - though the type arrived very late for the fighting of World War 1. Updated: 6/7/2017; Authored By Staff Writer; Content ©www.MilitaryFactory.com In the final year of World War 1 (1914-1918), Geoffrey de Havilland of AirCo developed an all-new, twin-engined biplane bomber in the form of the "DH.10". A first-flight was had on March 4th, 1918 and the type was introduced in November of that year - the same month the war officially came to a close. As such, the series did not leave its imprint on the Grand War and production was limited to 258 units with most arriving in the ensuring post-war period. The United Kingdom became its sole global military operator and the bomber served across some eight total squadrons in one form or another. Some continued on in civilian service in both the United Kingdom and the United States into the early-1920s. The DH.10 was built in response to a British requirement for a new bomber to help end the war. de Havilland revised the earlier DH.3 series biplane platform for the specification a prototype was quickly arranged for testing. This form - the "Amiens Mk I" - carried 2 x Siddeley "Puma" engines of 230 horsepower output and configured in a "pusher" arrangement (propellers facing rearward). The design did not impress British authorities who deemed it too slow so this led to a revision of the already-revised aircraft, now fitting 2 x Rolls-Royce "Eagle" VIII series engines of 360 horsepower each in a more traditional conventional "puller" set up. In this form - "Amiens Mk II - the project succeeded. However, due to the unavailability of Eagle engines, the production model - "Amiens Mk III" - was flown with American "Liberty" 12 series engines of 395 horsepower and it was this model that proved the mark-of-choice for the Royal Air Force (RAF) who officially adopted the Amiens as the DH.10. Amiens Mk III production totaled 221 examples. The Amiens Mk IIIA (DH.10A) was a version numbering 32 examples that flew with their engines fitted to the lower wing assemblies (as opposed to being suspended between the lower and upper wing assemblies as in the Mk III). The Amiens IIIC (DH.10C) was a limited-production model (five examples) that was flown with Eagle engines as insurance against availability of the American Liberty engines. ( WWI was not kind to the memory of DeHavillad's attempts to design aircraft. The DH-2 was known as the 'Spinning Coffin'. The DH-5 was the fighter that pilots hoped somebody else would fly. And then there was the DH-10. DeHavilland didn't get a winner until the early 30's when he initiated the "Moth" family of planes.[Hauksbee] ) Airco was bought by the BSA Company, but BSA was interested only in using the company factories for car production. Raising £20,000, de Havilland bought the relevant assets and in 1920 formed the de Havilland Aircraft Company at Stag Lane Aerodrome, Edgware, where he and his company designed and built a large number of aircraft, including the Moth family. In 1933 the company moved to Hatfield Aerodrome, in Hertfordshire. One of his roles was as test pilot for the company's aircraft. He was believed to have said "we could have had jets" in reference to the ignoring of jet engine possibilities prior to the start of the 1939–45 world war. His company's aircraft, particularly the Mosquito, played a formidable role in that war. In 1944 he bought out his friend and engine designer Frank Halfords engine design consultancy company, forming the de Havilland Engine Company with Halford as head. Halford had previously designed a number of engines for de Havilland, including the de Havilland Gipsy and de Havilland Gipsy Major. Halford's first gas turbine design entered production as the de Havilland Goblin powering de Havilland's first jet, the Vampire. His son, Geoffrey Jr, carried out the first flights of the Mosquito and Vampire and was killed in 1946 flying the jet-powered DH 108 Swallow while diving at or near the speed of sound. De Havilland controlled the company until it was bought by the Hawker Siddeley Company in 1960.

Well, when you put it that way, I've got to admit that, if I'm down on DH-2's, it's because of my OFF/WOFF experience with them. I've had two strikes against me: untrained and unexperienced.

Mike: I take your point. But the DH-2 had (probably) the worst handling characteristics of any WWI airplane. I know, there are some close contenders, but, for my money, the DH-2 takes home the marbles. Not for nothing was it called the "Spinning Coffin" and should you get the nose a hair above the horizon, you'll quickly find yourself in a stall. I simply forgot about the DH-4. Being a light bomber, it doesn't get much press. And the DH-9A...I never heard of.

A strange, but wonderful CGI cartoon found on YouTube...

I remember that one! A great piece of work. I must say that I didn't fancy the schoolboy humor. But when it came around the first time, I was doing a lot of 3-D modeling myself. I did, still do, respect the amount of work it took to build that many models, texture and animate, light the landscape and lip-sync the dialog. Just look at the credits: it took a lot of hands to make it happen.

A few years back, when I was still building 3-D computer models, I ran across a B/W illustration of the airplane below. There was no name or information about it, but I wanted one and built it. I didn't know at the time if it had ever existed or if it was just an Art Deco illustration. Last week I discovered the appended article. It was indeed real. 'Turns out that the designer, Vincent Burnelli devoted his life to promoting lifting body airfoil aircraft. He was brilliant in design, but had poor luck in getting his planes into production. I don't know why the author titled this piece "The Burnelli Conspiracy", but he did. The Burnelli Conspiracy The Address By Chalmers H. Goodlin on the occasion of his induction into the Niagara Frontier Aviation Hall of Fame May 15, 1987 The Vincent Justus Burnelli story started in Temple, Texas, in 1895. For the sake of brevity, I will pick it up in 1919, when young Vincent designed and built America's first great airliner, the 26-passenger Lawson [Ed.-- see picture on right]. This airliner was unique in its day and even flew a large number of congressmen around Washington in demonstration flights. But Burnelli considered it to be merely a streetcar with wings. Consequently, he designed and built the world's first lifting body in 1921, an airplane with an airfoil fuselage, the RB-1 , which could carry 32 passengers . In 1924, he built the RB-2 which, at that time, was the world's largest airfreighter. It could carry two automobiles and served as an Essex flying showroom for a time. The elevators and rudders were attached to the fuselage trailing edge, but it was learned that this arrangement did not provide adequate longitudinal and directional control. Therefore, when Burnelli built his next airplane, the CB-16 , in 1927 America's first multi-engined plush executive airplane with retractable landing gear he added twin booms to obviate the stability deficiencies of his first two lifting body airplanes. This airplane, incidentally, was the first twin engine airplane that could offer single engine capability at design gross weight. Burnelli next built the amazing GX- 3 for the Guggenheim Safety Contest in 1929, in which he produced the first break-away leading edge in combination with high-lift trailing edge flaps. This feature is now quite common on most jet transport aircraft. Burnelli told me how the F.A.A. then called the C.A.A. ordered him to bolt the leading edges shut, as they were a hazard to safe flying.

Here's some out-takes that I didn't have room for above. As mentioned above, Burnelli devoted his entire life to promoting fuselage-as-airfoil planes. He died in 1964. His last design was a "edge-of-the-atmosphere transport.

33LIMA: That video clip made me sorry I missed out on "Crimson Sky"...but I ended up spending an hour and a half on YouTube Watching the adventures of others. Burning Beard: When you say "paper model", I presume you mean balsa sticks and paper? I spent years as a kid making stick and paper models; cutting out formers with half of a Gillette Blue Blade razor blade, with a piece of adhesive tape on the backside. Damned fine looking model. What company issued the kit?

The AirCo DH.5 tried - rather unsuccessfully - to mesh some very distinct design qualities of previous de Havilland designs. Updated: 6/7/2017; Authored By Staff Writer; Content ©www.MilitaryFactory.com With the vantage point afforded to pilots of the earlier Airco DH.2 model, famous aircraft designer Geoffrey de Havilland set about to create an improved version through the DH.5. The end result was, however, one of de Havilland's more forgettable designs of the war - not highly regarded by either pilots charged with flying her or the historians left to cover her exploits. It did operate with a more useful interrupter gear allowing for better service from a fixed, forward-firing machine gun and held a light bombing capability. First flight was in August of 1916 with service introduction in May of the following year. Its operational limitations left just 552 examples built with the only users becoming the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) of Britain and the Australian Flying Corps (AFC). The Airco DH.5 biplane scout was somewhat unique in its design - a key quality being the backward-staggered upper wing element which allowed the pilot in a forward-set cockpit much improved views to the front and sides of his aircraft. As a "fighting scout" this proved ideal for spotting one's enemy first certainly held its advantages. The aircraft was powered by a sole 110 horsepower Le Rhone 9J 9-cylinder rotary engine in the nose driving a two-blade wooden propeller unit. A typical biplane wing assembly was used through a single bay approach and applicable struts and cabling provided the needed support as well as control for moving surfaces. The struts leaned noticeably rearwards to compensate for the upper wing placement over the aircraft. Armament was 1 x 7.7mm Vickers machine gun while a modest bomb-carrying capability was also given - 4 x 25lb bombs under the fuselage. With the interrupter gear, the gun could be installed over the engine housing and fired through the spinning propeller blades while also being relatively accessible by the pilot to clear weapon jams. As unique was the DH.5 design was attempting to be, the aircraft went on to have less-than-stellar performance and the mere appearance of the aircraft along airfields for pilots familiar with "traditional" biplanes was enough to put off most. The stigma against the DH.5 was so great that the model earned an unflattering reputation for instability though this quality was not a proven one. Couple this with the fact that the aircraft required a greater amount of training and experience to be able to handle effectively in a dogfight and the DH.5 was in operational service for no longer than eight months over any front. By January of 1918, the DH.5 was no longer an option and quickly replaced by more acceptable types as the war began to turn a corner - the DH.5 even failed as a basic trainer. Despite this, the DH.5 was still noted for its rugged construction which led to a sound over-battlefield piece where it operated at its best at low altitudes in the strike role instead of the high altitude (10,000 feet+) dogfighting role where performance dropped considerably. As a dogfighter, the DH.5 was a rather limited value mount for the position of the upper wing blocked a critical rearward view and the sole machine gun armament limited its offensive output against targets in its crosshairs. The light bombload was something of a saving grace for it allowed the DH.5 to operate in the bomber role and strike at unprotected targets. Five RFC squadrons eventually operated the type (Nos. 24, 32, 41, 64, and 65) and two AFC were also handed the DH.5 (No.2 and No.7 (Training)). None of the airframes survived the test of time as museum showpieces.

A question for you, Jim. I was reading a collection of "Biggles" short stories (Biggles of 266) and there was a moment when he was in the hangar talking to one of the rigging crew. The rigger quoted von Richthofen as saying, "If you're going to take on a two-seater, always kill the gunner first." It certainly seems like reasonable advice, and the author of the Biggles tales was there in France. But, the the best of your knowledge, did von Richthofen ever say it?

One of the guys over at "RoF" has set up a streaming video site at "Twitch". He (Hot Lead_Cold Feet) flies every other Sunday at 5:00pm with his younger brother (Cloaked Careful) and another buddy (Furious Flea) I have made these 'Sunday-a-fortnight' sessions a regular event and enjoy them greatly. If you can't catch them live, there's an archive section that has them stored. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/156153395

I agree. As you fly more and more, the need for labels gets less and less. In defense of RoF, their labels are the least intrusive. WOFF uses huge white rectangles with colored type. I'm sure the Devs inherited that from CFS3.

The only tree for miles and a plane fetches up in it. Two automobiles on a deserted stretch of road and they go head-to-head. Why is this? Recently I ran across an article that explained it quite simply. The pilot/driver can not look away from the disaster unfolding before him. He freezes on the controls. To avert the collision, you have to be able to look in the direction you want to go. For a car, this means left or right. For the pilot, it means anywhere but straight ahead.

So...it's snooze in the sun like lions (but tolerate fleas), or, bust my arse working all day, every day (but get TV in the evenings? Hmmmmm. That's a tough one.

One writer, responding to this article on RoF, opined that it was a shame that the author had to go to WOFF for aerial pics instead of RoF. But WOFF it was. I think I like WOFF in turn-of-the-century sepia better than full color. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/07/07/the-flare-path-100-years-ago-today/#more-458381

I have, in the past, queried religious people on whether God can see the future. Every one of them replied with some form of, "Oh yes. God is all-powerful. There are no limits to his power or abilities." So...how could a deity who can see the future not know that his human creation is susceptible to temptation? Or that his tree is irresistible?

Yes, that happened a while back. An improvement certainly, but SimHQ still looks like visual sandpaper. (I check in once or twice a week to see what's what with videos and new screenshots.) No problem getting it to come up today.

Check the top two pinned topics at the top of this page. (OFF & WOFF UE Screenshots, etc.)

Shocker#4! I was sure that was gunfire. I did not know Dr.1's suffered from that problem. I did know that planes early in the production run suffered upper wing failure that was attributed to shoddy workmanship at the Fokker factory (and never did fully regain pilots trust). Shedding fabric must have compounded the problem greatly. ps: Those Hi-Res skins really make a difference in close-up shots.

Will the Italian Front have "Mediterranean Light" like ROF instead of the "Dreary-Under-the-North-Sea" light that we have all come to love in OFF/WOFF?