PDA

View Full Version : Revival of WWI interest?



darkhorizon11
09-14-2006, 01:35 PM
With two new movies coming out and a game it seems that this fall and winter this little covered era of history will be in the public eye. Buy your stock and your memorabilia up now its gonna be worth something!

Hopefully this leads into WW2 revival and interest of aviation outside of these small circles we have now... Imagine if W. Peterson decides to do a movie about Hartmann? Graf? Gabreski? Sakai?

Comment away, I'll brb I just started drooling... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Kuna_
09-14-2006, 01:51 PM
Unfortunately I see that we need another "Oleg Maddox" to do that ww1 aero stuf properly.
Otherwise either they will copy Oleg inventions so far, either that new game will suck.

Seriously nothing I saw so far comes even near to the FB.

darkhorizon11
09-14-2006, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by Kuna_:
Unfortunately I see that we need another "Oleg Maddox" to do that ww1 aero stuf properly.
Otherwise either they will copy Oleg inventions so far, either that new game will suck.

Seriously nothing I saw so far comes even near to the FB.

I'm not gonna comment on the movies theres a dozen other threads about that...

But for the game the graphics look schnazzy. Of course thats all we have so far, theres no videos as of late OR screenies of maps or effects etc. just those diorama shots. Case in point I'll still give Gennadich benefit of the doubt since Oleg did entrust them with the code, he wouldn't just sell it to any team.

accpps
09-14-2006, 02:02 PM
I doubt it. ww1 planes are just not sexy like ww2 planes are.

sudoku1941
09-14-2006, 02:18 PM
Agreed. WWI is just plain boring.

They were flying glorified go-carts, with lawnmower engines, and could barely make it into the high double figures in airspeed. None of them had any climb rate to speak of, and weaponry so laughable that a revolver or shotgun was thought to be a valid choice of arms. Give me a break.

I suppose the novelty of flight itself accounts for much of the interest. Either that, or a tendency toward effete silk scarves.

Even the footage of the new Flyboys movie, I think, looks like the planes are moving twice as fast as the real ones actually did. You know how Hollywood does... I plan on seeing that movie, because it looks like fun. But, if I come out of the theatre hankering for some flight sim action, it'll be a WWII title at least that I go for.

leitmotiv
09-14-2006, 02:49 PM
I can't imagine anything "sexier" than an Albatros D.V. The power of the 1918 fighters was considerable. The films are likely to spur a WWI aviation craze like hasn't been seen since BLUE MAX more than forty years ago---I was there.

Phas3e
09-14-2006, 03:08 PM
I have a new found interest in ww1 since all these new bits and peices started showing up.
Im even watching a set of 'Four years of thunder ' dvds on ebay http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Agreed they arent as heart racing as a spitfire flypast, but there is still something special about a ww1 machine.
I would reinstall RB3D if I could find the bloody disk http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

sudoku1941
09-14-2006, 03:38 PM
Quoting Wikipedia:

The D.III was designed by Robert Thelen and R. Schubert. It was initially powered by a six-cylinder, 160 hp Mercedes D.III, giving a top speed of 165 km/h (103 mph).

Quoting John Deere.com:

5325 Utility Tractor (67 HP) 5-cylinder, 186 cubic inches

One cuts grass and never leaves the ground... one is supposed to fly at altitude and hunt other fighters... and doesn't even boast 3x the power of the lawnmower??? Puh-lease.

mrsiCkstar
09-14-2006, 03:47 PM
what are you? a WWI air combat denier? it didn't happen or something?

one could easily apply all your sorry arguements to any WWII fighter when compared to modern planes... doesn't make WWII boring and neither do yours make WWI boring.

those planes were advanced for the time.

Chuck_Older
09-14-2006, 03:54 PM
The dawn of aerial combat. Days when pilots had maneuvers named after them. The Dawn Patrol. Sesquiplanes. Zeppelins. Thousands rushed to the romantic call of battle and then were cast to their ignominous deaths for their 'glory'. Over the top! Men became the Eagle of Lille, the Balloon Buster, and the Red Baron. Wire and fabric protected pilots from twin spandaus and you had your choice of roasting the whole way down or jumping to your death when hit

Seems fairly dramatic and exciting to me. Sure a P-51 is sexier than a Harry Tate but the dogfight was king and the Blue Max was the King's crown. Count me in.

Hanglands
09-14-2006, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
With two new movies coming out and a game it seems that this fall and winter this little covered era of history will be in the public eye. Buy your stock and your memorabilia up now its gonna be worth something!


I just did!

Been to the Shuttleworth Collection today. In Hangar 1 (?) the one before you enter the shop, you can donate some cash and take away a piece of Tiger Moth or Sopwith Pup skin. I gave a fiver and took a 9" square piece of each. Bargain, I say.

sudoku1941
09-14-2006, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
what are you? a WWI air combat denier? it didn't happen or something?

one could easily apply all your sorry arguements to any WWII fighter when compared to modern planes... doesn't make WWII boring and neither do yours make WWI boring.

those planes were advanced for the time.

No, nobody's denying there was aerial combat in WWI. And nobody's saying the planes weren't "advanced" for the time, either.

I'm saying the combat was boring. About the only maneuvers you really could do were falling leafs or a break turn...simply because the engines didn't have enough power and the planes didn't have enough aerodynamics or structural integrity to do much else. Heck, in some of the planes, you had to turn the engine off before diving or you'd throw the prop at slightly over http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif 100 miles per hour.

Yawn...just like the static trench warfare on the ground.

Trinity_Jay
09-14-2006, 05:31 PM
Hello there!

This is my first post here and it's good to mingle with you all.

Just to let you know that I interviewed the lead honcho at Greddich and my article on "Knights of the Sky" will be in the next issue of PC Format magazine. It even includes an exclusive game still, and I have to say, it looks and sounds amazing. We're in for a treat.

Jay

DmdSeeker
09-14-2006, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:

I'm saying the combat was boring. About the only maneuvers you really could do were falling leafs or a break turn...

Ah yes; Immelman; the famous WWII pilot.....

I do wish you'd go away.

Blutarski2004
09-14-2006, 05:45 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by sudoku1941:
No, nobody's denying there was aerial combat in WWI. And nobody's saying the planes weren't "advanced" for the time, either.

I'm saying the combat was boring. About the only maneuvers you really could do were falling leafs or a break turn...simply because the engines didn't have enough power and the planes didn't have enough aerodynamics or structural integrity to do much else. Heck, in some of the planes, you had to turn the engine off before diving or you'd throw the prop at slightly over http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif 100 miles per hour.
QUOTE]

..... It's all relative. If plane A is 20 pct faster than plane B, it makes no difference whether plane A can make 450 mph or 150 mph.
Every single air combat tactic and technique utilized in WW2, with the exception of inter-a/c voice radio communications, was developed and employed in the air during WW1.

As for me, the biggest attraction by far with WW1 flight sims is that you typically can get close enough to your victim to really see and appreciate his cool paint job before you shoot him down. And, as I'm sure you know, it was a VERY colorful period.

LStarosta
09-14-2006, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Agreed. WWI is just plain boring.

They were flying glorified go-carts, with lawnmower engines, and could barely make it into the high double figures in airspeed. None of them had any climb rate to speak of, and weaponry so laughable that a revolver or shotgun was thought to be a valid choice of arms. Give me a break.

I suppose the novelty of flight itself accounts for much of the interest. Either that, or a tendency toward effete silk scarves.

Even the footage of the new Flyboys movie, I think, looks like the planes are moving twice as fast as the real ones actually did. You know how Hollywood does... I plan on seeing that movie, because it looks like fun. But, if I come out of the theatre hankering for some flight sim action, it'll be a WWII title at least that I go for.

Yeah, WWII planes were boring.

It takes them an eternity to get to altitude, they have no afterburners, they can't even go trans-sonic without either lawn darting or completely falling apart and Peter North has a higher rate of fire than any cannon fielded back then.

What a bore. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Ishmael932
09-14-2006, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
what are you? a WWI air combat denier? it didn't happen or something?

one could easily apply all your sorry arguements to any WWII fighter when compared to modern planes... doesn't make WWII boring and neither do yours make WWI boring.

those planes were advanced for the time.

No, nobody's denying there was aerial combat in WWI. And nobody's saying the planes weren't "advanced" for the time, either.

I'm saying the combat was boring. About the only maneuvers you really could do were falling leafs or a break turn...simply because the engines didn't have enough power and the planes didn't have enough aerodynamics or structural integrity to do much else. Heck, in some of the planes, you had to turn the engine off before diving or you'd throw the prop at slightly over http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif 100 miles per hour.

Yawn...just like the static trench warfare on the ground. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

as someone who flew in the online wars of Red Baron 2/3d for over 5 years and have been a WW1 flying buff for some 40 years, I must respectfully disagree with your conclusion. Sure the planes were slower/more primitive. so you actually had to fly by the seat of your pants and practice maneuver to a greater degree. Lest we forget, the principles of aerial dogfighting were developed in WW1 and are used to this day. Can you say Boelcke's Dicta? They are still used in every Top Gun fighting school to this day. Since the planes were slower and more unstable, you really had to concentrate on flying and fighting while breathing castor oil fumes throughout. All of this & no parachutes. Plus the variety of aircraft designs developed and used in that war are much greater than in WW2.

LStarosta
09-14-2006, 08:26 PM
Stglr, what kind of flight experience do you have in real life?

Bearcat99
09-14-2006, 08:30 PM
I disagree too... I just think that any flight sim... if it is to be accepted by real simmers.. it has to at the very least come to this bar. Gennadich will do that I think. Unless it gets cancelled. Right now the best thing in WWI flying is OFF....

I think WWI can be interesting..... if done right.

sudoku1941
09-14-2006, 10:19 PM
...wake me when it's over. I can predict nothing much of consequence will have happened.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Xiolablu3
09-14-2006, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
Stglr, what kind of flight experience do you have in real life?

He once flew a trainer, and now feels he knows everything there is to know about WW2 planes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif


I love the dogfights of WW1.

WW2 is alomst the same when its **** planes like Brewsters/Gladiators vs Ki43's/Ki27's.

2 light mgs on the Ki43, 2 light Mg's on the Sopwith Camel, just the same really.

LEBillfish
09-14-2006, 11:55 PM
Call me goofy, yet does anyone else get the impression that Targetsquare does not have a WWI flight sim in the works?

WWI is where most of the principals of air combat even used today were developed......Learn to be an ace in both a WWI T&B and Z&B fighter, and you will rule WWII skies.

Rookies need power, aces have skills http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Xiolablu3
09-15-2006, 12:01 AM
It has one called RIchthofens Skies.

I enjoyed the quick flight I had in it, its something different and not having to compete with Olegs fantastic sim. (where any WW2 game will come off poorly)

http://www.richthofens-skies.com/rs_gallery/images/rs_screenshots021.jpg

When I see the WW2 targetware stuff, I am automatically thinking 'hmmm thats not as good as Il2, nor that...' and so on.

But with Richthofens skies there was none of that, it just seemed like a nice little game.

Worth trying, for sure if you like WW1 combat.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish
Rookies need power, aces have skills http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Exactly.

OD_79
09-15-2006, 02:37 AM
Personally I am looking forward to it, it's a whole new challenge, ok it will take forever to get to any height but to say that it is really limited it a weird statement to make. The tactics for WW2 originated in WW1, by the end of WW1 they were using spread formations of four not vics and flying in Squadrons or Wings, all without the aid of radio communication.

Now I doubt you have the skill to pull that off with a few hours training and some seasoned fighter pilot on your six.

OD.

HotelBushranger
09-15-2006, 03:25 AM
Bring it on I say! I've always been a lover of WW1, and it's important that people get more exposure to the Great War and the aspects of it.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 03:46 AM
Anybody who dislikes looping and turning in an exhilarating biplane brawl has no business in this business---WWI will be fascinating. I hope they eventually have everything from the early Fokker monoplanes to the Junkers metal monoplanes. The P-51/Fw 190D set can stay in their time warp and purr contentedly.

R988z
09-15-2006, 07:11 AM
WW1 is pretty much what we have online now in most dogfight servers, just with WW2 aircraft.

WW1 would be perfect for an online sim. Lots of aircraft in dribs and drabs, some hunting alone, some flying to attack ground targets, the ability for some great personalised custom skins. This is what we have now online, just with WW2 aircraft. WW2 was a bit more organised in real life, like the co-ops we have online, WW1 was a bit more of a free for all in most cases and much more like we have in dogfighter servers online.

Of course no WW1 sim can be complete without the ability to land in fields and cut off a piece of fabric from your downed enemy as a trophy for the mess wall. No bailing out either, you have to try and land your burning kite in some field without being burned to death or shot by a kill stealer.

I'd love a decent WW1 sim. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

LEBillfish
09-15-2006, 08:02 AM
Well, a point is made by our resident maddox games hater yet is actually somewhat "in"-correct.

Boring is NOT the word for WWI combat. Now I've often semi-quoted WWII pilots by saying essentially "being a WWII pilot is hours, upon hours of tense, nervous boredom, suddenly broken up by 5 minutes of sheer terror, to then spend hours upon hours of absolute boredom to get home".

WWI, first off just taking off daily was a major accomplishment........If they make the FM's correct nothing is going to crack me up more then seeing 1/2 of the folks wreck their Camels & Dr1's on take off.......Just like real life.....Then you have to fight the plane to rediculous degree's simply to stay up. There is no "cruise" condition it simply a wrestling match all the way.

Keeping oil, fuel, to the engine, guns jamming left and right...Extremes of weather, exaust/oil/fuel/gunpowder fumes and soot, having to use just your eyes even to communicate. Why just doing an entire patrol will beat you up without combat.....Carb Stalls, plane stalls, no throttle, just a blip button....Engine stops?....Don't be fooled, these aren't gliders and don't restart, what's prop pitch?

Combat due to the very slow seperation rate IS a very long drawn out affair where most often there are only two outcomes.....You kill the others or are killed...........Now we fly that way here yet how we fly is so far from WWII combat that I've read about it's rediculous....I assume it's the billion life factor. The reward be it T&B or Z&B in WWI combat for being victorious is nothing short of amazing....

If you push the plane it breaks or stalls not recovering, yet you must get every bit of ability out of it. In kind it's not a slash and run often a chess match. Here we talk about climbs and jockeying for position....Sitting high above your enemy both climbing waiting to get the right angle to attack. Not very realistic for the era. Yet WWI planes though not ideal, if you don't get a kill the first pass you're often forced into it having had 1 vs. 1 dogfights lasting an hour.

Oh, did I mention the lack of a backup plan?....You either kill him, difficult to escape or crash as you don't bail out of your burning plane....You simply choose crashing, burning, or falling to your end.....

Then you get to wrestle it home and hope you land without crashing.....Be sure to judge the landing well too....No brakes.

Online, even with such an old sim as RB3d, it was common to see folks take long breaks after a single patrol. The tension of combat in the sim actually taxing if good fights. Better still, when in 1 life/night mini wars that last 2-3 hours, it's awesome to see even the best AVOID fighting as it's not as sure a thing as here a slashing attack.....Teams upon seeing each other often trying to sneak away, until the "hero" type noob races in, gets shot down yet then it's too late as you all raced to help him.........Now you're in it.

Slow, twisting, every error very costly.....WWI fighting makes WWII seem like childs play.

I really look forward to getting back into it.....and believe me, where in when an ace of this sim is seen by the opposing team it's almost a race to try and kill him, in a WWI sime it's suddenly paniced shouts over coms and chat of LE~ High 6!!.....Those low doomed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LStarosta
09-15-2006, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish
Rookies need power, aces have skills http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I am currently working with the U.S. Air Force on developing potent non-projectile surface to air weapons to deal specifically with MiG and Sukhoi aircraft.

It has to do with portable air show tents, but if I told you any more, I'd have to put a .45ACP through your noggin. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EDIT: Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4S88pxQF6E) is a declassified video of the prototype weapon system.

joeap
09-15-2006, 08:20 AM
Good lord, boring? When even taking off in planes of that era was putting your life in jeopardy? I hardly think so.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 08:30 AM
Add to that the rare treat of being subjected to castor oil engine lubricant fumes for hours with resulting effects on continence. In addition there were daily patrols at over 10,000 feet with no oxygen with the dazzling prospect of passing out from anoxia and boring a hole in the ground.

Doug_Thompson
09-15-2006, 08:45 AM
Re: Boring

There's a reason there's been a dearth of WWI flight sims.

I enjoyed WWI sims greatly, but if you lost your height you died.

Some people won't enjoy it. They should, however, recognize that they are making a personal assessment and not stating fact.

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
WW2 is alomst the same when its **** planes like Brewsters/Gladiators vs Ki43's/Ki27's.

2 light mgs on the Ki43, 2 light Mg's on the Sopwith Camel, just the same really.


NOT really.

The engines in even the biplanes of the early WWII era (Gladiators, CR-42s, etc.) had way, WAY more oomph than those WWI kites. The early WWII biplanes could actually boast some kind of climb rate. The controls were more advanced (some WWI planes didn't even have ailerons, fer cryin' out loud). Also, the speeds the biplanes could attain and maintain in a fight were worlds ahead of the dogfights of the First World War.

As for guns, both classes were lightly armed, but this was already being addressed when the second war broke out. There were even some Russian biplanes with 20mms, and the British were about to learn the hard lesson that even EIGHT .303s weren't really good for much but skinning bombers. Still, there were quite a few Ki-43 aces who got by on those twin pop-gun configurations...

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Well, a point is made by our resident maddox games hater yet is actually somewhat "in"-correct.

Boring is NOT the word for WWI combat. Now I've often semi-quoted WWII pilots by saying essentially "being a WWII pilot is hours, upon hours of tense, nervous boredom, suddenly broken up by 5 minutes of sheer terror, to then spend hours upon hours of absolute boredom to get home".

WWI, first off just taking off daily was a major accomplishment........If they make the FM's correct nothing is going to crack me up more then seeing 1/2 of the folks wreck their Camels & Dr1's on take off.......Just like real life.....Then you have to fight the plane to rediculous degree's simply to stay up. There is no "cruise" condition it simply a wrestling match all the way.

Keeping oil, fuel, to the engine, guns jamming left and right...Extremes of weather, exaust/oil/fuel/gunpowder fumes and soot, having to use just your eyes even to communicate. Why just doing an entire patrol will beat you up without combat.....Carb Stalls, plane stalls, no throttle, just a blip button....Engine stops?....Don't be fooled, these aren't gliders and don't restart, what's prop pitch?

Combat due to the very slow seperation rate IS a very long drawn out affair where most often there are only two outcomes.....You kill the others or are killed...........Now we fly that way here yet how we fly is so far from WWII combat that I've read about it's rediculous....I assume it's the billion life factor. The reward be it T&B or Z&B in WWI combat for being victorious is nothing short of amazing....

If you push the plane it breaks or stalls not recovering, yet you must get every bit of ability out of it. In kind it's not a slash and run often a chess match. Here we talk about climbs and jockeying for position....Sitting high above your enemy both climbing waiting to get the right angle to attack. Not very realistic for the era. Yet WWI planes though not ideal, if you don't get a kill the first pass you're often forced into it having had 1 vs. 1 dogfights lasting an hour.

Oh, did I mention the lack of a backup plan?....You either kill him, difficult to escape or crash as you don't bail out of your burning plane....You simply choose crashing, burning, or falling to your end.....

Then you get to wrestle it home and hope you land without crashing.....Be sure to judge the landing well too....No brakes.

Online, even with such an old sim as RB3d, it was common to see folks take long breaks after a single patrol. The tension of combat in the sim actually taxing if good fights. Better still, when in 1 life/night mini wars that last 2-3 hours, it's awesome to see even the best AVOID fighting as it's not as sure a thing as here a slashing attack.....Teams upon seeing each other often trying to sneak away, until the "hero" type noob races in, gets shot down yet then it's too late as you all raced to help him.........Now you're in it.

Slow, twisting, every error very costly.....WWI fighting makes WWII seem like childs play.

I really look forward to getting back into it.....and believe me, where in when an ace of this sim is seen by the opposing team it's almost a race to try and kill him, in a WWI sime it's suddenly paniced shouts over coms and chat of LE~ High 6!!.....Those low doomed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

You think Maddox would model all that? He doesn't even have appreciable torque or engine management in his WWII planes, for fear the players can't learn it..! You don't really think he'd make the earlier, far less potent aircraft even harder to fly, do you?

Not to mention the players... you think they have patience for any of what you describe past turning circles and doing falling leafs until they crash or shoot something? Please... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Saburo_0
09-15-2006, 10:46 AM
WW1 is the cat's meow!

http://www.fokkerdr1.com/Arrtwork/Downedace_Art.jpg

LEBillfish
09-15-2006, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Not to mention the players... you think they have patience for any of what you describe past turning circles and doing falling leafs until they crash or shoot something? Please... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I'll match my virtual WWI lessons against anyone elses WWII or better in a WWII sim.....Think on that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Daiichidoku
09-15-2006, 11:47 AM
do not be fooled into thinking that BnZ was not a valid, nor indeed, a much used tactic during WWI

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 12:14 PM
It wasn't; there was no zoom to speak of.

Having an upsun altitude advantage was a great one, to be sure... it could make for a devastating initial attack or an unseen bounce...

but you could not maintain or "work" an energy advantage for very long because the climb took so much out of these planes, that you had to dedicate to a climb at the expense of any other maneuver, just to allow your "hamsterwheel" engine to move you further aloft.

Once you started the fight, you were pretty much stuck with turning and nose down maneuvers, falling leafs, etc. Hence the "dogfight". You certainly weren't going to be doing many climbing loops (which is why the Immelman became so famed; it must've been truly rare to have a situation where you had so much smash that you could use it, and in the maneuver itself you were more likely to shed your wings in a dive or rip them off trying to come over the top of the Immelmann). A chandelle would likely be the extent of it, and not much of a chandelle at that.

slipBall
09-15-2006, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Well, a point is made by our resident maddox games hater yet is actually somewhat "in"-correct.

Boring is NOT the word for WWI combat. Now I've often semi-quoted WWII pilots by saying essentially "being a WWII pilot is hours, upon hours of tense, nervous boredom, suddenly broken up by 5 minutes of sheer terror, to then spend hours upon hours of absolute boredom to get home".

WWI, first off just taking off daily was a major accomplishment........If they make the FM's correct nothing is going to crack me up more then seeing 1/2 of the folks wreck their Camels & Dr1's on take off.......Just like real life.....Then you have to fight the plane to rediculous degree's simply to stay up. There is no "cruise" condition it simply a wrestling match all the way.

Keeping oil, fuel, to the engine, guns jamming left and right...Extremes of weather, exaust/oil/fuel/gunpowder fumes and soot, having to use just your eyes even to communicate. Why just doing an entire patrol will beat you up without combat.....Carb Stalls, plane stalls, no throttle, just a blip button....Engine stops?....Don't be fooled, these aren't gliders and don't restart, what's prop pitch?

Combat due to the very slow seperation rate IS a very long drawn out affair where most often there are only two outcomes.....You kill the others or are killed...........Now we fly that way here yet how we fly is so far from WWII combat that I've read about it's rediculous....I assume it's the billion life factor. The reward be it T&B or Z&B in WWI combat for being victorious is nothing short of amazing....

If you push the plane it breaks or stalls not recovering, yet you must get every bit of ability out of it. In kind it's not a slash and run often a chess match. Here we talk about climbs and jockeying for position....Sitting high above your enemy both climbing waiting to get the right angle to attack. Not very realistic for the era. Yet WWI planes though not ideal, if you don't get a kill the first pass you're often forced into it having had 1 vs. 1 dogfights lasting an hour.

Oh, did I mention the lack of a backup plan?....You either kill him, difficult to escape or crash as you don't bail out of your burning plane....You simply choose crashing, burning, or falling to your end.....

Then you get to wrestle it home and hope you land without crashing.....Be sure to judge the landing well too....No brakes.

Online, even with such an old sim as RB3d, it was common to see folks take long breaks after a single patrol. The tension of combat in the sim actually taxing if good fights. Better still, when in 1 life/night mini wars that last 2-3 hours, it's awesome to see even the best AVOID fighting as it's not as sure a thing as here a slashing attack.....Teams upon seeing each other often trying to sneak away, until the "hero" type noob races in, gets shot down yet then it's too late as you all raced to help him.........Now you're in it.

Slow, twisting, every error very costly.....WWI fighting makes WWII seem like childs play.

I really look forward to getting back into it.....and believe me, where in when an ace of this sim is seen by the opposing team it's almost a race to try and kill him, in a WWI sime it's suddenly paniced shouts over coms and chat of LE~ High 6!!.....Those low doomed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

You think Maddox would model all that? He doesn't even have appreciable torque or engine management in his WWII planes, for fear the players can't learn it..! You don't really think he'd make the earlier, far less potent aircraft even harder to fly, do you?

Not to mention the players... you think they have patience for any of what you describe past turning circles and doing falling leafs until they crash or shoot something? Please... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Thats why I am hoping for switches....that would satisfy all walk's of pilots...very few want full real, but it would be great to have

LEBillfish
09-15-2006, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
It wasn't; there was no zoom to speak of.

Having an upsun altitude advantage was a great one, to be sure... it could make for a devastating initial attack or an unseen bounce...

but you could not maintain or "work" an energy advantage for very long because the climb took so much out of these planes, that you had to dedicate to a climb at the expense of any other maneuver, just to allow your "hamsterwheel" engine to move you further aloft.

Once you started the fight, you were pretty much stuck with turning and nose down maneuvers, falling leafs, etc. Hence the "dogfight". You certainly weren't going to be doing many climbing loops (which is why the Immelman became so famed; it must've been truly rare to have a situation where you had so much smash that you could use it, and in the maneuver itself you were more likely to shed your wings in a dive or rip them off trying to come over the top of the Immelmann). A chandelle would likely be the extent of it, and not much of a chandelle at that.


You really havn't studied WWI combat much have you?........That's not meant as an insult, or a question, yet in all frankness you're really exceeding your knowledge base on this subject. If it's something you have no interest in that's perfectly understandable, yet then that begs the question of why you're fighting against this so hard?

Xiolablu3
09-15-2006, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Once you started the fight, you were pretty much stuck with turning and nose down maneuvers, falling leafs, etc. Hence the "dogfight".


This is wrong.

Almost as bad as you saying that the Germans should 'walk through' France in 1940 on Tank /Weapon quality alone.(French and British Tanks/Guns were BETTER on the whole than the Panzer I,II and III in France 1940)

I am reading Johnnie Johnsons 'The Story of Air Fighting' right now and almost a third of it is dedicated to WW1 fighting.

The tactics in WW1 are no different to WW2...The WW1 pilots had a motto

Always Above
Seldom CO Alt
Never Below

The tactics in WW2 were also used in WW1.

Stigler, you really dont know as much as you think you do, mate.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 12:40 PM
He's bored.

joeap
09-15-2006, 12:41 PM
He's boring.

Xiolablu3
09-15-2006, 12:42 PM
He thinks he knows it all, but doesnt.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 12:49 PM
The classic bore.

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 12:56 PM
I got a hint from "Over Flanders Fields" what a really great WWI sim would be like, and, as Billfish maintains, skill and airmanship are at the forefront. If you like power and boom and zoom, use the SE5A or the SPADs---not all WWI aircraft are frail and asthmatic, and, if they are, you have to learn to fly around their liabilities which can be fascinating.

x6BL_Brando
09-15-2006, 12:58 PM
What I don't understand is why people who have a self-confessed dis -interest in a type of flight-sim , will go to such pains to **** it off to people who are genuinely interested, even excited at the prospect.

It resembles the automotive scene to me. I ride a fast modern(ish) bike and sidecar. People laugh at that but they have no experience or understanding of what's involved in riding a three-wheeled machine at speeds of up to 120mph. No comprehension of how it is to corner at eighty when the configuration doesn't allow leaning, or any of the differences involved. They just mock because they see it as old-fashioned and therefore slow and somehow unworthy.

That attitude sticks until I get them in the chair and we go for a burn. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif Afterwards, well I can't remember any real biker that didn't get out of the sidehack without going "Wow - that was wild!" While my outfit may not be able to burn off a Yamsakawahonki - it can still carry me, my wife, all the camping equipment and the beer at over 100mph. The latter being always appreciated at wherever we meet up.

I think the temporal relativity is being ignored here with regard to the biplanes - in the same way that anyone who's never fired up a Vincent (or a 50's Harley) has no idea what they're missing. Neither of the latter bikes will go much over a ton (OK US peeps, I'm just being polite) - but just ask the rider whether he/she'd rather be riding a Hayabusa.

Their answer, like mine, would be to laugh. And don't forget - they are likely to get passed by plenty of rice-burners, whereas it's unlikely that you'll meet a Spitfire over Verdun 1917.

B.

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sudoku1941:
It wasn't; there was no zoom to speak of.

Having an upsun altitude advantage was a great one, to be sure... it could make for a devastating initial attack or an unseen bounce...

but you could not maintain or "work" an energy advantage for very long because the climb took so much out of these planes, that you had to dedicate to a climb at the expense of any other maneuver, just to allow your "hamsterwheel" engine to move you further aloft.

Once you started the fight, you were pretty much stuck with turning and nose down maneuvers, falling leafs, etc. Hence the "dogfight". You certainly weren't going to be doing many climbing loops (which is why the Immelman became so famed; it must've been truly rare to have a situation where you had so much smash that you could use it, and in the maneuver itself you were more likely to shed your wings in a dive or rip them off trying to come over the top of the Immelmann). A chandelle would likely be the extent of it, and not much of a chandelle at that.


You really havn't studied WWI combat much have you?........That's not meant as an insult, or a question, yet in all frankness you're really exceeding your knowledge base on this subject. If it's something you have no interest in that's perfectly understandable, yet then that begs the question of why you're fighting against this so hard? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not "fighting against" anything. I'm merely stating my opinion that WWI combat was "boring"... which itself is open to debate, what constitutes boring vs. interesting.

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Once you started the fight, you were pretty much stuck with turning and nose down maneuvers, falling leafs, etc. Hence the "dogfight".


This is wrong.

Almost as bad as you saying that the Germans should 'walk through' France in 1940 on Tank /Weapon quality alone.(French and British Tanks/Guns were BETTER on the whole than the Panzer I,II and III in France 1940)

I am reading Johnnie Johnsons 'The Story of Air Fighting' right now and almost a third of it is dedicated to WW1 fighting.

The tactics in WW1 are no different to WW2...The WW1 pilots had a motto

Always Above
Seldom CO Alt
Never Below

The tactics in WW2 were also used in WW1.

Stigler, you really dont know as much as you think you do, mate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, actually the admonition to have an alt advantage is even MORE important to survive a WWI dogfight than a WWII battle, simply because you can't just decide to gain alt and do it. The engines of all the combatants were simply too weak, so you had to HAVE the alt advantage before the fight.

In WWII, though, it was possible to wrest an alt advantage away from a plane that initially had more height, and use said advantage for multiple gunpasses, as well as an advantage in sustained climb rate, to turn the tables during a fight. Try that with a WWI kite. Doesn't work.

As for France '40, it was the German advantage in modern tactics, and the Allied adherence to static, WWI-style fighting that set the stage for the Axis walkover in that campaign.

Von_Rat
09-15-2006, 01:14 PM
Well, actually the admonition to have an alt advantage is even MORE important to survive a WWI dogfight than a WWII battle, simply because you can't just decide to gain alt and do it. The engines of all the combatants were simply too weak, so you had to HAVE the alt advantage before the fight.


In WWII, though, it was possible to wrest an alt advantage away from a plane that initially had more height, and use said advantage for multiple gunpasses, as well as an advantage in sustained climb rate, to turn the tables during a fight. Try that with a WWI kite. Doesn't work.

you better check out the climb rates of a fokker dr1 vs a spad 13. the fokker has quite a advantage in climb over a spad. i think it could get above a spad rather easily if flown right.


climb rates, no matter how crappy compared to ww2, should only be compared to other ww1 planes. in other words a large advantage in climb rate can be used as a advantage, just like in ww2.

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 02:56 PM
Well, compare that advantage vs. the amount of energy each could gain by diving or energy creating maneuvers, and you see that you can't USE that advantage tactically for as much as you could, say, use the disparity between a 109 and a Hurricane... or a Zero vs. a P-40.

Of course, you could learn that lesson by flying a decently modeled WWI simulator... and then that might interest you...

LEBillfish
09-15-2006, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Of course, you could learn that lesson by flying a decently modeled WWI simulator... and then that might interest you...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Here we go..............Any suggestions Sudoku1941?........and if the comments you're making as to WWI combat are representative of it, are you sure it is a "decently modeled WWI simulator"?


I await the TW reply http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Of course, you could learn that lesson by flying a decently modeled WWI simulator... and then that might interest you...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Here we go..............Any suggestions Sudoku1941?........and if the comments you're making as to WWI combat are representative of it, are you sure it is a "decently modeled WWI simulator"?


I await the TW reply http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly, I couldn't tell you if Richthofen's Skies is "a good WWI simulator", because I just don't fly it. The few times I have, though, I've found what I've posted to be true. But then, they don't concentrate on the late war "hot rods", rather more of the earlier war kites... either way, it bores me to tears.

Viper2005_
09-15-2006, 03:48 PM
Using very rough figures to make the point:

Late in WWI maximum speeds in level flight were low. Let's say 100 mph or so. 100 mph = 45 m/s which is worth about 103 m of altitude.

Late in WWII maximum speeds in level flight were higher. Let's say 400 mph. 400 mph = 179 m/s, which is worth about 1633 m of altitude.

That means that WWII fighters have about 16 times as much kinetic energy to play with.

In WWI, altitude was far more important than speed. In WWII, speed became important. In the modern era, speed is probably more important than altitude; the v² term really bites above about 400 mph!

So, in a WWI scenario it should be easier to judge relative energy states due to the relative unimportance of kinetic energy. Smaller altitude advantages become critically important; if you've got more than about 100 m advantage then you're totally out of reach.

In addition, because speeds are lower, turn rates are much higher (the v² term again) and so if anything combat is likely to be faster paced. I haven't flown WWI scenarios online, and I must say that I'll jump at the chance as and when a WWI sim appears. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ouston
09-15-2006, 04:02 PM
Each to their own but I cannot describe Great War aerial combat as boring. I find it endlessly fascinating and marvel at the bravery of the airmen of both sides. In terms of simulations I have had a lot of fun from Flying Corps Gold, Red Baron and OFF, the last being the only good thing I have seen come out of CFS3. Flying a balloon busting sortie involves as much tactical nounce and nerve as anything in WWII. A new simulation might include such unusual elements as contact patrols, artillery spotting and photo recce missions as well as the pure dogfight element. The tactical side is absorbing and in real life involved stalking and knowing when not to engage. Strange though it may seem this was cutting edge technology for 1914-18, however puny it may seem to us. The sheer bloody guts and guile required to fly the planes are to be wondered at. These were the men the pilots of WWII looked up to.

Pip pip

Ouston

JG6_Oddball
09-15-2006, 04:09 PM
I think this maybe a mistake but this link is to a IL2 WW1 screenshot page...nice pics
http://www.gemmrig.de/www.wingsofhonor.com/il2ww1/scree...screenshots_en.shtml (http://www.gemmrig.de/www.wingsofhonor.com/il2ww1/screenshots/woh_il2ww1_screenshots_en.shtml)

THERES IS WINGS OF WAR DEMO
http://www.gamershell.com/pc/wings_of_war/downloads.html


here is a good site for all the WW1 sims , links,pics, forums...etc
http://www.gemmrig.de/www.wingsofhonor.com/index.shtml
S!

F6_Ace
09-15-2006, 04:36 PM
I think it might be interesting but maybe a little 'one dimensional'. I know nothing about it but, then again, I knew nothing about the Eastern Front at one time, either (still don't, apart from reading Stalingrad by Beevor).

If I took flying bi-planes in Il-2 as a yardstick, I think it would be almost 'comical' combat without too much in the way of tactics which is entirely reasonable as a lot of tactics were not even realised then. Hence, one dimensional; everything pretty much geared to tnb with the odd exception.

Potentially good, though, as most planes would have 'dashes' with almost as much wood as a Mk3 Cortina 2000E

JG6_Oddball
09-15-2006, 04:39 PM
forgot about this one...the tile of the forum discription says"there upcoming release" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
here are some of the screens
http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2804&pos...ostorder=asc&start=0 (http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2804&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)

S!

TAW_Oilburner
09-15-2006, 04:42 PM
I just wanna fly the Gotha http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LStarosta
09-15-2006, 06:01 PM
EDIT: Shoot, I really didn't mean that.

Or maybe I did.

I dunno.

sudoku1941
09-15-2006, 06:20 PM
Originally posted by ouston:
...marvel at the bravery of the airmen of both sides. ... The sheer bloody guts and guile required to fly the planes are to be wondered at. These were the men the pilots of WWII looked up to.


That I agree with. You had to have big brass ones to climb into one of those glorified egg crates.

HellToupee
09-15-2006, 06:28 PM
the performance difference between modern planes eg lockon and ww2 eg il2 are about the same as ww1-2 planes so does that make il2 bad?

Performance is totally realative to what ever your fighting.

Von_Rat
09-15-2006, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by sudoku1941:
Well, compare that advantage vs. the amount of energy each could gain by diving or energy creating maneuvers, and you see that you can't USE that advantage tactically for as much as you could, say, use the disparity between a 109 and a Hurricane... or a Zero vs. a P-40.

Of course, you could learn that lesson by flying a decently modeled WWI simulator... and then that might interest you...


yes you could use that advantage tactically.

who cares if its not as much energy as ww2 fighters. your comparing apples and oranges. as long as you can use a superior climb rate to get a advantage against another ww1 plane is all that counts. any comparing to the amount of energy ww2 planes create is irrelavent.

LStarosta
09-15-2006, 08:21 PM
Stglr, when was your earlier username registered?

WWSensei
09-15-2006, 08:46 PM
****, long post was eaten.

Anyhow, thinking there was boring fights and no energy tactics in WWI is just a statement of ignorance on WWI combat. Immelmann's classic turn, Rickenbacher's Vrille and Cuban 8, Boelcke's Fokker Bounce etc are all classic energy fighting techniques and most certainly not "turn and burn" maneuvers.

The good tacticians from WWI and WWII adhere to most of the same rules and the good ones disdained aerobatic maneuvers. Spot your enemy first, sneak up on them, blast them from close range before they even knew you were there and avoid prolonged fights.

TnB fights burn energy, and contrary to the belief that they devolved into low level turn fights the sheer lack of an abundance of energy meant they tended to use energy tactics far more in WWI than in WWII. They had too.

The idea that WWI fighting would be "boring" is but a personal opinion. Personnally, I find WWII "boring" and long for a good WWI sim to return to market and the WW2 era sims will collect dust on my shelf. Second to WWI for me is Korea. I fly IL2 because there just isn't anything better out there and I have about zero interest in the upcoming BoB. Not slamming 1C or their talent it's just I have no interest in the genre of BoB and not willing to lay out the cash for a new system to run it.

LEBillfish
09-15-2006, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by F6_Ace:
I think it might be interesting but maybe a little 'one dimensional'. I know nothing about it but, then again, I knew nothing about the Eastern Front at one time, either (still don't, apart from reading Stalingrad by Beevor).

If I took flying bi-planes in Il-2 as a yardstick, I think it would be almost 'comical' combat without too much in the way of tactics which is entirely reasonable as a lot of tactics were not even realised then. Hence, one dimensional; everything pretty much geared to tnb with the odd exception.

Potentially good, though, as most planes would have 'dashes' with almost as much wood as a Mk3 Cortina 2000E

Tactics, actually "were" developed then.....Ex. look up "Boelcke's Dicta" which states;
1. Try to secure advantages before attacking. If possible, keep the sun
behind you.

2. Always carry through an attack when you have started it.

3. Fire only at close range, and only when your opponent is properly in your
sights.

4. Always keep your eye on your opponent, and never let yourself be
deceived by ruses.

5. In any form of attack, it is essential to assail your opponent from behind.

6. If your opponent dives on you, do not try to evade his onslaught, but fly to
meet it.

7. When over the enemy's lines, never forget your own line of retreat.

8. For the Staffel: Attack on principle in groups of four or six. When the fight
breaks up into a series of single combats, take care that several do not go
for one opponent.

Now those to many will just sound like rules of engagement to follow much like pilots in New Guinea held to "Never follow a Japanese fighter through 180 degree's of a turn".......Yet in truth, using those and other rules as a foundation tactics were developed from them.

I've read many state that "the rolling scissors" was a WWII concept.....Un true, look up jink, or side slipping. Also concepts of E retention as Sensei says above WERE much more important. In fact, besides diving ability high H.P. to weight planes were desperately fought for in development so help aid not so much the master of flight yet the rookie, to be more forgiving when a goof was made.

You state that it's rather one dimensional everything geared to T&B......That's actually exactly opposite of the tactics taught....

SLashing attacks just as in later wars yielded the most kills, the enemy never even knowing you were there. Having to consider before an attack how you would escape if needed. Wingmen & how to utilize them, how to sneak up on opponents, quite simply a multitude of things. In fact, most manuevers you know of were developed in that era.

What is different is a mistake could really cost you....and there is none of the rediculous ranges we see today or even in WWII.....Plus, you MUST make shots count.

It boils down to this.......If you are turn fighting, you screwed up, plain and simple. Frankly I think that's why many will NOT like a WWI sim...........As it is flat out, no compromise, unforgiving.

I can't wait, time to see who the REAL virtual aces are.........More so, you cannot even imagine the degree of competition you all are going to see when the old timers from RB3d show.

It's gonna be ugly hehe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

leitmotiv
09-15-2006, 10:25 PM
Von Richthofen's favorite attack position was from below---riddle the belly before the occupant(s) knew he was there. He was an excellent hunter and his expertise with the rifle showed in air combat. Some of his contemporaries said he was not very good at aerobatics---but superb at tactics of positioning himself for kill shots. Of course, he was not above a pell mell chase---that's how he killed the redoubtable Hawker and that's how he was killed.

Watch THE BLUE MAX---excellent depiction of WWI air combat. The airplanes come at each other almost in slow motion, slow-firing guns going Tak Tak Tak---not the buzz saws of WWII. No HELLS ANGELS loops and stunts.

LEXX_Luthor
09-15-2006, 10:26 PM
British and French pilot's average lifetime of "2 weeks" during Bloody April 1917 was not boring, nor one dimensional.

Billy_DeLyon
09-15-2006, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:

8. For the Staffel: Attack on principle in groups of four or six. When the fight
breaks up into a series of single combats, take care that several do not go
for one opponent.


Someone forgot to tell the AI http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

LEBillfish
09-16-2006, 01:08 AM
Originally posted by Billy_DeLyon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:

8. For the Staffel: Attack on principle in groups of four or six. When the fight
breaks up into a series of single combats, take care that several do not go
for one opponent.

Someone forgot to tell the AI http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You must of missed the AI in 3.04, or whatever it was............People griped and whined so much about them they de-tuned them. By far, they flew team like no other, and watching even just 2, if not 6 AI hammer on 1 live pilot each hitting and then baiting so the next could hit and so on......It was awesome.

By far, the best AI yet.........You could not tell they were AI till the kill registered. Call for help?.....In a couple seconds your opponent was dead........Was stunning, hope they bring them back.

LEBillfish
09-16-2006, 01:15 AM
Oh, BTW, memorize "Dicta Boelcke"......Every bit of it if followed will DRAMATICALLY change your kill to death ratio here by far. Item 6 you will find particularly useful........Plus, it changes your mindset to the Japanese one of "there is only 1 tactic, Attack, Attack, Attack".......Practice that then eventually you'll learn when and what defense has value yet won't before.

leitmotiv
09-16-2006, 02:16 AM
Worked for Manfred.

F6_Ace
09-16-2006, 04:09 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
British and French pilot's average lifetime of "2 weeks" during Bloody April 1917 was not boring, nor one dimensional.

How long they lasted has zip to do with how 'dimensional' it was.

wrt LEBillfish, like I said, if a decent simulation of it came along, I'd be open to being educated about it. I've always thought the aircraft of the era were interesting as it seemed that they really were in the realms of experimentation (more diverse designs than early WW2) and that it would be 'seat of your pants' flying which isn't necessarily 'my style' but I do accept the arguments that it could well be similar to WW2 combat except 'in slow motion'

I should also add that 'some' tactics were developed there, not all.

Xiolablu3
09-16-2006, 04:23 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Von Richthofen's favorite attack position was from below---riddle the belly before the occupant(s) knew he was there. He was an excellent hunter and his expertise with the rifle showed in air combat. Some of his contemporaries said he was not very good at aerobatics---but superb at tactics of positioning himself for kill shots. Of course, he was not above a pell mell chase---that's how he killed the redoubtable Hawker and that's how he was killed.

.

Leift, didnt he dive down from on high and THEN come back up under the belly?

I am pretty sure thats how Jonson describes it in his book.

leitmotiv
09-16-2006, 04:33 AM
Absolutely. Down and under---the classic attack.

LEBillfish
09-16-2006, 07:50 AM
Originally posted by F6_Ace:
I should also add that 'some' tactics were developed there, not all.

Missing where I used or implied "all"?

F6_Ace
09-16-2006, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F6_Ace:
I should also add that 'some' tactics were developed there, not all.

Missing where I used or implied "all"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You didn't. I was emphasising that only some were.

DuxCorvan
09-16-2006, 10:10 AM
Try TnB in an Albatros vs Nieuports or Sopwiths, or in a SPAD or Bristol against Fokker Dr.I, and you're fried.

BnZ did also work in WW1, and there were planes designed to have tough structures and use energy tactics (SPADs are a good example).

It's all more or less the same, except for lower speeds, closer distances, no tracers, unreliable engines and fragile machines. BTW, since speeds and distances were less, deflection shooting was easier, and rear gunners were far more effective than in WW2 -without reaching the supernatural levels of Il-2 overmodelled gunners.

It's as enjoyable and complex as WW2, maybe even more. It's only that most of you ignore the facts and machines, or are less familiar to them.

I think it is a pity all future games and films ignore the earlier times -up to 1916- when air fight WAS INVENTED. It was a dangerous, funny and interesting stage of air history. It's also a pity that only Western Scenario is always shown, the fight of Austrians vs Italians (who BTW produced excellent fast reconaissance and ENERGY fighters) or the bombing Russian campaigns are unknown to the most and are... totally sweet (from a 'forgotten' sim fan POV).

heywooood
09-16-2006, 10:22 AM
ignorant WWI air combat 'afficionados' really should read this (http://www.richthofen.com/rickenbacker/)

among other interesting accounts...


It might clear up a few total missconceptions

leitmotiv
09-16-2006, 06:14 PM
Arthur Gould Lee's NO PARACHUTE based on the author's letters of the time is very interesting. You will have to resort to inter-library loan to find it. The patrols at over 10,000 feet with no oxygen amazed me. Seems to me a WWI sim will have to model anoxia effects, not to mention effects of being numbed into indifference by high altitude flights in exposed, unheated cockpits.

heywooood
09-17-2006, 10:04 AM
really accurate details must not be left out..

effects of cold and anoxia must be represented by redout or slowed control response...perhaps a representative *gulp* health bar for the pilot?...

I know....'gamey' but maybe the newbies can have it as an optional HUD display and the rest of us can just go with the effects as an indication that its time to lose altitude and fly home.

leitmotiv
09-17-2006, 11:56 AM
I 'spect this could be handled neatly by by a subtle gray-out, diminished range to spot targets, lessened control sensitivity, and sudden black-out if you actually pass out. There really is nothing you can do about it because, if you are ordered to patrol for an hour at 12,000 feet, that's what you must do. If your pilot is a heavy smoker and a drunk, factor that into the equation, too!

LEXX_Luthor
09-17-2006, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by F6_Ace:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
British and French pilot's average lifetime of "2 weeks" during Bloody April 1917 was not boring, nor one dimensional.

How long they lasted has zip to do with how 'dimensional' it was.

wrt LEBillfish, like I said, if a decent simulation of it came along, I'd be open to being educated about it. I've always thought the aircraft of the era were interesting as it seemed that they really were in the realms of experimentation (more diverse designs than early WW2) and that it would be 'seat of your pants' flying which isn't necessarily 'my style' but I do accept the arguments that it could well be similar to WW2 combat except 'in slow motion'

I should also add that 'some' tactics were developed there, not all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
We Agree. WW1 air combat was not one dimensional.

ALL the core important tactics were developed in WW1.

People's lives depended on it.

That's why they invented ALL of the core tactics.

They had to.

Or die.

Most important tactic developed. Stalk from the sun, Bounce out of the sun, or fly as if you always expect immediate attack from the sun.

But this is not "dogfight" tactic but Air War tactic, so its not important in most combat "dogfight" flight sims. Oleg is possibly the first cfs developer to make a sim that really blinds players looking into the sun, but only if the sunglare is turned fully on. TargetWare has no sun, but Stiglr says one will be modelled eventually. Make sure it blinds players. As there is no AI in that sim, all aircraft will be blinded by the sun.

leitmotiv
09-17-2006, 09:54 PM
There is a prejudice that air fighting existed primarily in a debased form until the Fw 190D, P-51D, Spitfire IX, and Me 262, and that everything that came before this exalted pantheon was corrupted by low power-to-weight ratios, low firepower, and by incapacity for boom and zoom tactics. Since I boom and zoom while using the SE5A, I-16, the J8A, and the I-153, I find this attitude jejeune and amusing. As far as I am concerned, battling with the pantheon and jets from the Me 262 up to the present crop, is mainly an exercise in eyesight because you have gone so far so fast you had better have eaten a bowl of carrots to be able to see the dust mote-sized target way off in the distance. This is not to deny that actions at such speeds and with such firepower aren't thrilling in the extreme (I am eagerly awaiting the Ta 152C in Luft 46), but, perhaps because of declining eyesight, I prefer tearing up and down with the less formidably endowed engines so that I can see the bistid.

PikeBishop
09-18-2006, 06:28 AM
Dear All,
The idea that WWI is boring does not really hold water for me. Air combat has not changed since Boelker's Dictat, with all the basic manoeuvres there. The RELATIVE performance difference will still show up between aircraft. It's just that the space these manoeuvres takes up will be less and the times shorter. What I think really WILL change the nature of the game is if the AI CANNOT see through clouds. Then people will probably spend a lot of time looking around in clouds trying to spot aircraft through the little breaks and sneaking up on them, than just avoiding the clouds.....or not having them at all. Just flying about in different cloud formations will be fun......just don't forget that you are in a war!!
In 1918 the fighters on each side were becoming very capable and not only will you be able to carry all of the manoeuvres out, but playing coops will be great fun!!
I think we are in for a real treat........if our computers can cope with it all!
Best regards,
SLP.