33LIMA

Very nice indeed!

Yes to expansion or plane packs, definitely. IMHO, the dev approach to P4 sounds spot on - prioritise updates to the engine rather than aircraft additions. There are enough new planes in prospect already. Get P4 out when the major engine updates are ready, yet more planes can follow.

Here's those scans:

OK I think I've hit paydirt here. In the unlikely source of Osprey's 'Pusher Aces of World War 1' there's a nice clear close-up photo of '...Nungesser in his 3 LAS with a rack of bombs installed on one side of the nacelle', will scan that aSAP. PS the above photo shows what looks like TWO of the racks illustrated in the other book's side view, fitted side by side and carrying 2x4=8 bombs with distinctive fragmentation cases and exxtended rod fuses designed to burst them before they dig in.

Hi Stephen! The Italian book 'Warbirds - Military Aircraft of the First World War in Colour' (mine is a translation edited by W Green) includes the Voisin as one of the 25 planes featured and has a decent 2-page 5-view colour spread of 3LA V1391 of the AMF plus some pics and some colour side profiles of various other Voisins. Re the bomb load, there is a small undated photo of a 3LA of 7 Squadriglia whose caption says '...early type of bomb rack is visible beneath the cockpit; French airmen of the day preferred to carry their bomb loads attached to the sides of the fuselage.' The bomb rack in question looks to be a typical (ie similar to RFC Cooper Bomb racks under scout fuselages) steel tube framework fitted about a foot beneath the nacelle, roughly where the front and rear V struts from the undercarriage meet; but it's a small photo with ground crew obscuring part of the rack. There is a colour side view of Italian 3 LA V1317 (with Isotta Fraschini inline engine) showing this rack carrying a short oblong bomb with fins at the end of a rod, and the rack is drawn as an inverted T shape, in side view. Another of the colour side views is of the port side of Belgian 3LA V505; this is illustrated with three tall, thin finned bombs carried vertically side-by-side, nose uppermost, in a rack on the side of the nacelle, beside the observer's (rear) cockpit. Trying to interpret the side drawing, the bomb rack looks to consist of a tray (open topped rectangular box) maybe 2 feet long by maybe 4 inches high fitted with its base just above the bottom of the nacelle (in which the bases of the bombs sit), with a rectangular hoop or rail level with the top of the nacelle above it to retain the noses of the bombs (which extend a few inches above the level of the rail/nacelle top edge) and and a rail each side running from the outer edge of the lower tray, up to the outer edge of the rail. Presumably there would be an identical rack on the other side of the nacelle. I've not found any photographic confirmation of this but it looks a bit detailed to be an invention and accords with the caption for the differently-fitted Italian machine. Under 'Technical description', the text for the VoisinLA says amongst other things 'The bomb load was racked horizontally under the fuselage or vertically, along the sides'. This is a big book but I can try to get some scans if that would help.

Great stuff - got it already! Many thanks!

Yeah it's good to talk, except when adherents (I won't say 'fanboys') of this or that sim get defensive/agressive at any whiff of criticism, which is fortunately rare here at CombatAce. Given its unequalled comprehensiveness, I would probably have been very happy with (or resigned to?) OFF's dogfighting and flight leading experience and would have put any frustrations down to my own preferences/failings/lack of TrackIR/lack of rudder pedals etc...except having 'rediscovered' FE earlier this year and spent the time to get familiar with it and tweak it to suit my tastes, I just found it significantly better in those important respects, despite some limitations in other, to me less important areas. To my mind anyway; as you say, each to their own. If P4 tackles most or all of the remaining CFS3 legacy issues it'll really leave very little to be desired, especially with the additional 2-seaters which will be particularly welcome additions. But they do need to tackle some of those other issues too, not just add planes/improve graphics. Either way, I'm still waiting for a true successor to RB3d. It had weaknesses of its own to be sure, but the comprehensive representation of the air war, the planeset (especially with the 'UOP' mods and/or Campaign Manager) and that magical campaign system, complete with squadron scoreboard, decent pilot logbook and the event cutscenes (loved the POW escape!), have yet to be bettered. OFF probably comes closest to claiming the RB3d crown and would win hands-down IMHO but for those CFS3 legacy issues. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for P4. I'm optimistic that the very welcome solution to the lightweight AI, which really spoiled air-to-air for me in CFS3 (and is rather more important in a WW1 air war sim than in a WW2 tac air one) will tip the scales as regards the OFF dogfighting experience. In the meantime am happy to enjoy all three sims for what I find each one best at.

Some info on DH5 flight characteristics quoted from Profile Publications # 181 'the De Havilland DH5' by JM Bruce: Report of the Testing Squadron of the RFC's Central Flying School in December 1916: 'Stability - quite satisfactory. Lateral and longitudnal very good, directional fair. Controllability - quite satisfactory. Machine easy to land and to fly. Handy and quick in the air. Length of run to unstick 60 yards. To pull up with engine stopped 120 yards. Tactical features - Vickers gun...can be elevated to about 60 degrees from the horizontal. Facilities for reconnaissance good. Machine is handy and quick in the air. The view forwards, upwards and downwards is very good...directly behind is badly masked by top plane.' Capt JE Doyle DFC writing after a first flight, reported '...the DH5's stalling characteristics had been exaggerated, and on the flight home I found it a most comfortable and pleasant machine to fly, extremely sensitive to aileron control.'

VERY nice work there - off to grab it now - thanks!

Good, well-balanced assessment there, Tamper. Would differ in some respects eg sure, OFF is 'more complete' than RoF (or FE) in some respects (like the (integrated) planeset and the scale of air operations), but it has gaps of its own, generally CFS3 'legacy' issues like the 'unladen weight' uber AI (reportedly being fixed in P4), very poor AI formation-keeping, indifferent aircraft visibility without using aids (FE is significantly better, and RoF's aids are more subtly implemented), an improved but still pretty dire map, a too-limited ability to handle forced landings without ending in the plane rolling over and wrecking fatally and (to me anyway) some unduly-sluggish flight models (perhaps more an effect of the 'unladen' AI planes than anything else). To me it's much more important P4 adequately improves these remaining CFS3 issues, rather than adding more planes and improving graphics. I enjoy the OFF environments and flying the 2-seaters (except the BE with its disappointingly-unrealistic armament) but its dogfighting I find too often ends in frustration, and for that aspect - my main interest in WW1 - I turn to FEG/FE2 or RoF. Also I think First Eagles shines with or without the mods - yes, it was well behind the curve on initial release with only 3 flyables, equally few AI-only planes, and indifferent AI, DM and FM; but all these areas were vastly improved with FE Gold/Expansion Pack and this continued in FE2, which loses seasonal terrain but adds some improvements of its own like 'persistent' plane wreck graphics and longer view distances. Yes the RoF career mode when it finally came is still a very small-scale affair with little happening and some predictability; but the flying and dogfigthing (as with FE) I find really exhilirating and with the arrival soon of the RE8 it'll finally have a decent later-war planeset and hopefully, slightly more busy skies.

The Fee with the third Lewis is an FE2d not an FE2b - note the former's radiator right behind the pilot instead of the 2b's 'ear' radiators either side, and the 2d's simpler 'bathtub' nacelle, without the 2b nacelle's 'peak' between pilot and engine, out of which the 'ear' radiators appear. I doubt many (if any )2b's had a third Lewis. There's some info on the particular 2d and crew pictured above, in Osprey's 'Pusher Aces', think it may have been a Home Establishment-based night fighter, can't look it up as I'm on holiday in Spain at the moment, weather is great but I'm missing the virtual skies even if they are often grey in OFF.

Very nice - another gap in the FE planeset is about to be filled; not much left now, hope you can manage a BE2e and an LVG CVI efore you REALLY slow down!!!.

Back on topic, I have and fly all 3 of the current commercial WW1 flight sims and each is best in some respects. OFF has supreme scope & depth out of the box, more so with the HiTR expansion, tho it still has some CFS3 legacy issues like AI flying at unladen weight and poor formauion-keeping. RoF excels at recreating the feeling of flying and dogfighting in WW1 planes; tho it won't have an adequate 2-seater planeset for 1917-18 till the RE8 arrives and has no early 2-seaters at all despite its many early scouts, it's still worth having for hat it does well. First Eagles Gold/FE2 outgrew the 'sim-lite' label long ago, after the early TW patches; it excells at reproducing the patrol-leading and dogfighting experience, key elements for a WW1 sim, thanks to an adequate planeset, very good AI and good plane visibility without any visual aids FEG/FE2 also has clever implementation of squadron and individual markings and a sound SP campaign and single-mission system; plus all the mod community content, which gives it much the biggest planeset.and extra campaigns to take advantage of it. Enough to put FEG/FE2 ahead overall, in my experience,tho I like all three for what they do best.

Seeing a ref to a 'de-tuned' flightless Bleriot used by a pre-war flying school in the book 'Fighter Heroes of WW1' (good book despite the paperback edition's corny title, a bad write-up by one reviewer on Amazon and its concessions to a modrn readership) triggered a distant memory of a WW1 film that I think was about the Lafayette Escadrille. The only bit I recall was the trainee pilots zipping crazily about the airfield in Bleriots (the Channel-crossing type monoplanes) which had had their wingspan clipped well short, so they could not take off, for ground training purposes. It's not Hell's Angels nor Dawn Patrol in any of its incarnations.I'm pretty sure the trainees in the clipped Bleriots were US ones, so I thing the Escadrille Lafayette/Americaine was the subject. Anyone else remember this one and can name the movie? Was a 'talkie' so not that old, but probably black & white not in colour. Fairly sure it was a movie, not a distant memory reconstructed visually from something I'd read.

That'll be the one! Funny I never saw any refs to it in online discussions of WW1 airwar movies. Doesn't sound too bad, must see if I can find it for sale. Cheers!

Nice find there, may try one. I recall back in the seventies I read an article in 'Scale Models' magazine, by someone who scratchbuilt rubber-powered scale balsa models of ww1 planes. Beautiful, they were, and I made a whole series of my own, rather crude tho mine were; satrted with DV, also had a Blue Max set of SE5, DVII and DrI, a Bleriot XI, and an FE2, all 1/24 scale IIRC. Just used scale drawings of my own; still have some old jotters with some of the drawings I made for their parts but the models are long gone. Were remarkably easy to make, even down to the props laminated from strips of balsa skewered in a wire then fanned out and sanded into shape. Have been thinking about making some more.

Hey, that's neat! Will grab it when I get home. The Brisfit is a nice plane, had an interesting duel with couple flying for Jasta 15 in the First Eagles Bloody April Campaign, which is an excellent add-on once you have downloaded and installed all the many extra planes needed. Chasing the nearest Archie got me into a long tail-chase with a couple of 2 seaters that could only have been Bristols, they were so fast. Nailed them only after they turned back for home, and then only after a pretty vicious dogfight. Tough opponents, must see if I can fly that campaign as an F2B pilot as well as my favoured Albatros.

Thanks for the help Whiteknight, got the D/L as I was waiting for the taxi to the airport and am now on the hotel wi-fi. And gracias, Ojcar for the welcome to Espana (and for your FM work!). It must be nearly 30 degrees here in Benidorm; taking a holiday can be tough work but somebody has to do it! Will be looking forward to getting back into the virtual skies with all the latest First Eagles goodies when I get back; something to look forward to.

Cheers! I'm off to Spain for a few days from tomorrow so if I'm not back in touch for a bit, it'll be because the hotel wi-fi ain't working or the laptop's melted, not because I'm ungrateful

'Oh! What a Lovely War!' is a bit Brighton Pier-based and trades heavily on the 'lions led by donkeys' theme but it's a great source of the British songs of the period, many of which show that the irrepressible 'squaddie humour' has been around from at least the days they called 'squaddies', 'Tommies': All together now, 'When this lousy war is over, no more soldiering for me...I shall kiss the Sergeant Major, how I'll miss him, how he'll grieve!'

Thank you, much appreciated! It's not showing up yet (looked in the 'newest files' section on the CombatAce home page, also in the 'FE skins' section at downloads here) but perhaps it takes a while to appear as an active download.

Just before we get back on topic, I for one tend to go with the view expressed by some historians, that the significance of 'Ultra' decoding, and code-breaking generally, is often over-stated. Of course there are some exceptions (like maybe the mortain counterattack in Normandy, and more importantly Midway, where the US ambushed and destroyed the Japanese carrier force largely on the basis of USN code breaking, and to a lesser extent, re U-Boat message traffic). The thing is, important and detailed orders were transmitted, not via Enigma, but by teleprinter/land line or courrier. In general, Enigma was used for relatively short-term, tactical traffic. Decoding this was certainly helpful but it gave Allied commanders another piece in the jigsaw and not some kind of magical view of 'the other side of the hill'. Also, whether the switch to London reprieved the RAF is often debated these days. Some LW commanders (Jeschonnek IIRC was one), not just Goering, thought it necessary, not as a reprisal for RAF Berlin night raids, but to force the RAF to commit its fighter reserves - 'the last fifty Spitfires' - so they could be worn down in air combat. The USAAF had much the same motive for mounting daylight attacks Berlin in early 1944, and few people criticise that move. In both cases, attacking the capital had a certain logic. Going for London took some pressure off the RAF airfields and made life even harder for the short-legged 109s but I'm not sure it was a decisive factor. The Luftwaffe would have had to have been extraordinarily fortunate and/or effective, and the RAF extraordinarly unfortunate and/or ineffective, for the Battle to have ended in anything other than a strategic defeat for the Luftwaffe. I think it was Keitel or von Rundstedt who, when asked by the Soviets at the end what he considered to be the war's turning point, disappointed them by answering, not as they'd expected, 'Stalingrad', but 'the Battle of Britain'. He had a point.

Thanks Hansa! Weird, you have to be registered to post here, yet the error message is implying you'e a guest when you try to upload. Maybe you could upload it to CombatAce, Whitenight, as Hansa's cool with that? Would appreciate it, as no doubt would anyone else blighted by Sky's apparent blocking of Mediafire (must have happened recently, access was ok, just a week or so ago).