Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About gavagai

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Indiana, USA
  1. I'm not the flight leader. I haven't patched up to 1.21. I'll see if that helps. Thanks for the suggestions.
  2. Yeah, I was hoping not to do that. When the WOFF AI works, it works very well. I really like that the AI tries to save its skin by running away. Something seems amiss with how it evaluates the tactical situation.
  3. I can check off a list of things that should make our flight more willing to flight: Elite squadron? Check. Altitude advantage? Check. Numerical advantage? Check. Over friendly territory? Check. Yet, again and again, Jasta 2 bugs out the moment an enemy aircraft appears. It seems to happen almost 50% of the time. Most recently there was a single Spad 7 at a lower altitude, and that caused all eight Jasta 2 scouts to bug out for home. Why?
  4. WOFF FM Thread

    Bucksnort, not sure if you saw this yet from chill31: That's the only level airspeed gps data we're going to get from a contemporary (replica) Dr.I pilot. We'll never know the real airspeed of the WW1 Dr.I, but his measurement lines up well with our old hypothesis that it was not as fast as the ~115mph figures that can be found.
  5. WOFF FM Thread

    I don't claim they had French-made Clerget engines. Some of the license built engines were OK, many of them were not. For airspeed, I would go with what Rise of Flight has. When they have the time of year for test data, they will adjust performance to match 15 degrees C and 767mm Hg. They did that for the D.VII and I am confident they did that for the Triplane. Otherwise it would fly 120+ mph.
  6. WOFF FM Thread

    The 130hp Clerget was license built in the UK. It was the license that made them expensive. The license built engines were notorious by the Fall of 1917 in Camel squadrons. French made Clergets were much better. Notice that one of the brand new license-built engines was worse than a French engine with 64 hours of wear.
  7. WOFF FM Thread

    Keep in mind that the Sopwith Triplane test data is from December 1916. The dense winter air will make the same scout look much more attractive compared to its performance in the summer. The ceiling alone can vary by 2000ft, and the airspeed by 5-10% depending on the altitude. But I agree that it was faster than the Camel. I've never heard of Triplanes having the disappointing engine performance that the Camel had. Trenchard was so mad he wanted to replace all of the Clerget engines on the Camel with 110hp Le Rhones.
  8. WOFF FM Thread

    121.5 mph is over the top, but what's the reason for why the Triplane should be slower than the Camel at sea level? Frontal cross-section area?
  9. WOFF FM Thread

    I think I figured out what's happening. You added right rudder, and not left rudder. The default xfm file has a line for gyroscopic moment in response to yaw. By default pitch is highly dampened. Removing the pitch dampening allows the gyroscopic moment to be felt, so when you rudder right you're pitching forward, which increases speed. Rudder left and you slow down more because you pitch up. What I can do is to also reduce the gyroscopic moment, and maybe give a little more freedom in the yaw axis. Then there should be more consistent airspeed loss due to yaw.
  10. WOW!

    Use the JSGME ready download, Aroth. And I have to agree with the OP. It really brings things to life. Lighting is at least as important as texture detail for the experience of being there.
  11. WOFF FM Thread

    No speed loss at all? Is that an exaggeration or you want to see more speed loss? I tried it out and there is definitely a loss of airspeed with full rudder. Thank you for the feedback! What I was going for is to approximate the yawing behavior you get in Rise of Flight, which is very convincing. I'll see if I can do better.
  12. WOFF FM Thread

    This chart is a real mish-mash of sources. Notice that none of the aircraft with a 110hp Oberursal are reaching 115mph @ sea level like the Dr1 in WOFF. ------------------ Here is one of the paradoxes of WW1 flight models: the Albatros D.II versus the Albatros D.III. Pilots describe the Albatros D.III as being better in every way, but wingloading is very much in favor of the Albatros D.II. I'm wondering how much flight sims do a bad job of incorporating interference between the wings of the stout and boxy D.II. In Rise of Flight the D.II is a slow motion UFO, and in WOFF its handling is much better than the other Albatrosses. This chart compares the lift of biplanes compared to monoplanes as a %, where biplanes lose lift because of interference between the two wings: gap:chord ratio Albatros D.II = 0.87 Albatros D.III = 1.34 The D.III's aspect ratio is also superior to the D.II. Using chill31's spreadsheet (which actually calculates munk's span factor for a very subtle estimation of biplane aspect ratio), the aspect ratios are Albatros D.II = 3.6 Albatros D.III = 5.0
  13. File Name: Alb_DVa_N17_FM_mod File Submitter: gavagai File Submitted: 08 March 2014 File Category: Modding Tools and Add-on Software This is a jsgme package with flight model adjustments to the Nieuport 17 and Albatros D.Va for WOFF. Extract it into c:\OBDSoftware and use the jsgme switcher to enable the mods. Click here to download this file
  14. Version 1.0


    This is a jsgme package with flight model adjustments to the Nieuport 17 and Albatros D.Va for WOFF. Extract it into c:\OBDSoftware and use the jsgme switcher to enable the mods.
  15. Awesome, thanks! It was just a stupid copy and paste error in one of the FM files. The posted file in the OP is correct now.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..