PDA

View Full Version : Dynamic Airflow for Knights of the Sky!



stathem
04-27-2007, 03:21 AM
Click on Promo Movie 8 (http://www.gennadich.com/lang/en/)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

With Dynamic airflow, 6DoF, and self casting shadows, KoTS is looking more and more like a major competitor, a SoW generation flight sim rather than an IL2+ generation FS.

Competiton is good? or is it now inappropriate to follow it's progress on these Il2 boards?

stathem
04-27-2007, 03:21 AM
Click on Promo Movie 8 (http://www.gennadich.com/lang/en/)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

With Dynamic airflow, 6DoF, and self casting shadows, KoTS is looking more and more like a major competitor, a SoW generation flight sim rather than an IL2+ generation FS.

Competiton is good? or is it now inappropriate to follow it's progress on these Il2 boards?

carguy_
04-27-2007, 03:27 AM
This game can`t be BoB`s competitor.

Flying will be very different between those games I think.

I buy both but it is not like I actually have to choose one.

Capt.LoneRanger
04-27-2007, 03:34 AM
Both games are a MUST.

KotS will really rock and I'm very much looking forward to this game. Rotating engines, ignition control instead of throttle, dynamics and flight modell. This game will really rock.
But BoB will be stunning, too, though most of this game is pure speculation due to the very little news and even less material released, yet.

mrsiCkstar
04-27-2007, 03:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> This game can`t be BoB`s competitor.

Flying will be very different between those games I think.

I buy both but it is not like I actually have to choose one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this might be a more hard core simmer stance... I think someone who's just looking for a flight sim to enjoy will go either or... and other people might find the battle of britain to be way over done and opt for the refreshing WWI sim... so in that sense it will be a competitor I believe.

stathem
04-27-2007, 04:09 AM
I suppose I didn't really mean competitor in the sales sense; I think it's likely that a large proportion of us would buy both due to the niche market nature of CFSims.

I meant more in the technical sense; you know that that's a big driver between competing developers in any walk of life. Particularly since GT maintain that KoTS will run well on current systems.

Capt.LoneRanger
04-27-2007, 04:11 AM
The sound is friggin' awesome and they really allready implemented inertia and the ignition throttle - awesome. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Roblex
04-27-2007, 04:47 AM
For me it all comes down to what the online experience is. I cannot get interested in playing against AI no matter how good it is.

Feathered_IV
04-27-2007, 04:55 AM
A WW1 scenario is much more suited to the online environment than any second world war stuff. The small operational area and poor cooperation of most DF servers is pure Dawn Patrol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ploughman
04-27-2007, 05:21 AM
The engine looks pretty spiffing, while KotS is initially simulating a different era of combat aviation to SoW: BoB I wonder if the KotS engine would be able to compete against the SoW engine in the future; a KotS engined WWII sim? KotS: Korea? Or SoW: Flanders FUBAR!

Capt.LoneRanger
04-27-2007, 05:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
A WW1 scenario is much more suited to the online environment than any second world war stuff. The small operational area and poor cooperation of most DF servers is pure Dawn Patrol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% agree

I just hope they modell simple gestures, so you can point at enemy planes or make hand-signs to communicate. That would be extremely immersive, online. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ploughman
04-27-2007, 05:52 AM
Why is the KotS banner aviator a duck?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Yellow_Sub
04-27-2007, 05:57 AM
Just watched the video. So what will be the benefit, of this system, if the planes cause air turbulences or actually move air with their propellers? Just a for graphical gimmicks?

Also I think BoB will have a similar system at least when it comes to air movement and weather.

269GA-Veltro
04-27-2007, 06:02 AM
Both for me too, but this da.n WW1 sim seems to be really promising! I can't wait for it!

Pinker15
04-27-2007, 06:04 AM
I think Knights of the sky engine is going to be much more advanced than SOW cause its completly new compare to refreshed old Il2 engine to be. I remember what programers of Kinghts said that they wanted to use Il2 engine but they realized that it is to basic (obsolete) and cant fit to their project.

Pinker15
04-27-2007, 06:05 AM
I think Knights of the sky engine is going to be much more advanced than SOW cause its completly new compare to refreshed old Il2 engine. I remember what programers of Kinghts said that they wanted to use Il2 engine but they realized that it is to basic (obsolete) and cant fit to their project.

Bearcat99
04-27-2007, 06:22 AM
I'll have both.....

Haigotron
04-27-2007, 06:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'll have both..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-27-2007, 06:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pinker15:
I think Knights of the sky engine is going to be much more advanced than SOW cause its completly new compare to refreshed old Il2 engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

WRONG! SoW:KotS is based on a new engine too. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
04-27-2007, 07:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Yellow_Sub:
Just watched the video. So what will be the benefit, of this system, if the planes cause air turbulences or actually move air with their propellers? Just a for graphical gimmicks?

Also I think BoB will have a similar system at least when it comes to air movement and weather. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Eye-candy? Barely.

Just imagine settling on an enemies six and suddenly having an effect like flying in a thunderstorm in IL2 at ground-level and even worse. With these light-weight-planes, it will slow you down and eventually even cause stalls, if you allready have a damaged wing or something like that.

Oh, and of course, you still need to get that enemy plane in your sights.

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 08:15 AM
Some of us have nothing to look forward to other than KotS. We only fly IL-2 because Red Baron's limitations became too much to handle, and we have no interest in BoB. Soon as KotS comes out we'll be gone thereto. "Good Riddance," will say some. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Blutarski2004
04-27-2007, 08:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
Some of us have nothing to look forward to other than KotS. We only fly IL-2 because Red Baron's limitations became too much to handle, and we have no interest in BoB. Soon as KotS comes out we'll be gone thereto. "Good Riddance," will say some. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... You'll have to break out that "photo" of you posing in your flying gear in front of your SPAD.

;-]

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 08:38 AM
Still one of my most cherished photos. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ernst_Rohr
04-27-2007, 09:20 AM
I am a slobbering WWI flight nut, so I will definatly be jumping into KOTS with both feet. My original online play was RB3D, and a French Nieuport squadron.

I am looking forward to this big time. At the same time, I will be picking up SoW as well. I like WW2 aviation just as much.

If it has a prop and guns, im flying it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 09:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
My original online play was RB3D, and a French Nieuport squadron. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Most cool. I first seriously got into online flying in RB1 back in the early TSN days when you could only have four aircraft in an arena at a time. I dabbled in Air Warrior some, but the WWI stuff was where I lived. I was one of the founding members of the Lafayette Escadrille (LEBillfish still wears the uniform around here, and some of the other members are slowly getting into IL-2 last I heard) but I transferred to the WW when they migrated to IL-2 after RB3D had really run its course for all practical purposes.

Then I dropped out of flight sims altogether for several years and just got back in the saddle with 1946--just in time, it seems, to migrate again when KotS hits the shelves. Ain't the life of a virtual pilot an interesting one? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Frankenstein000
04-27-2007, 09:38 AM
My heart is really in the KotS camp, but I think it's safe to say I'll be getting both. I'm also from the old RB3D days (Callsign is RACFrankenstein from the Royal Air Corps afterall...) and I'm dying to get back in the virtual skies over Flanders ASAP.

Ernst_Rohr
04-27-2007, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
My original online play was RB3D, and a French Nieuport squadron. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Most cool. I first seriously got into online flying in RB1 back in the early TSN days when you could only have four aircraft in an arena at a time. I dabbled in Air Warrior some, but the WWI stuff was where I lived. I was one of the founding members of the Lafayette Escadrille (LEBillfish still wears the uniform around here, and some of the other members are slowly getting into IL-2 last I heard) but I transferred to the WW when they migrated to IL-2 after RB3D had really run its course for all practical purposes.

Then I dropped out of flight sims altogether for several years and just got back in the saddle with 1946--just in time, it seems, to migrate again when KotS hits the shelves. Ain't the life of a virtual pilot an interesting one? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Same here, I got started with the original RB, and Aces of the Pacific, then on to RB3 and EAW and Falcon 3. Then I dropped out of the flight arena for a while. Never got into Air Warrior (couldnt afford it at the time). Got back into simming with IL-2, and I dabble with some of the others like BoB, Falcon AF, and LOMAC, but I am really a prophead at heart. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
04-27-2007, 09:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
This game can`t be BoB`s competitor.

Flying will be very different between those games I think.

I buy both but it is not like I actually have to choose one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This really seems like all that needs to be said on the matter, except for the samll point that if I want a WWII flight simulation, a WWI flight simulation is not in competition for anything I wish to buy- even if I purchase it

Ernst_Rohr
04-27-2007, 09:48 AM
Started as a Nieuport flyer, but that squadron didnt last long. Went over to the other side, and this same handle (Ernst_Rohr) or variations of it has followed me since then. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ernst_Rohr
04-27-2007, 09:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB462cid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
This game can`t be BoB`s competitor.

Flying will be very different between those games I think.

I buy both but it is not like I actually have to choose one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This really seems like all that needs to be said on the matter, except for the samll point that if I want a WWII flight simulation, a WWI flight simulation is not in competition for anything I wish to buy- even if I purchase it </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree completely. The only real competition is finding enough time to fly them both! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

slappedsilly
04-27-2007, 10:01 AM
KOS won't be a direct competitor at first, but once the engine is completely done I'm hoping they will use it for different eras.

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 10:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
The only real competition is finding enough time to fly them both! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ah, and therein lies the rub! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif I don't dislike IL-2, it's actually giving me quite a bit of enjoyment (apart from the sucking at it part) but I can't see ever having the time to devote to two different sims. I'm afraid the wind in the wires will be calling me with the sweetest song.

AKA_TAGERT
04-27-2007, 10:16 AM
raaid is going to have fits about that air flow

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 10:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
raaid is going to have fits about that air flow </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
We'll have to explain how the whistling sound comes from the Bernoulli effect.

major_setback
04-27-2007, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ernst_Rohr:
The only real competition is finding enough time to fly them both! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

KOTS
SoW:BoB
Flying Tigers

There won't be enough time http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif.

heywooood
04-27-2007, 02:43 PM
yes both - and any other sim that simulates the flying...with or without combat.

I am leaning towards KotS though, big time.

in the meantime - this FSX is alot of fun...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/goose2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/wagstaff.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/ponder.jpg

the FM's are good and the 'pits are f'n great both 2d and 3d style click pits...or you can keymap it all.

...beauty clouds AND water, eh?

and I can fly in Canada - its a win win situation...

JG6_Oddball
04-27-2007, 03:39 PM
I cant believe how excited I am to see this sim http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif RB3D was my first sim and left and lasting love for ww1 aircraft.
S!

major_setback
04-27-2007, 03:39 PM
I think that video is amazing. All that is happening in real-time. That would have been a dream a few years ago.
I hope (and believe) that we will feel the turbulence from a plane that crosses our flight path. It would be good if smoke was affected by these drafts, though I suspect that that's asking too much.

I'm greatly thankful for the thoughtfulness of the development team in keeping us posted on game development http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif.



I want to see my scarf dance in the wind.

heywooood
04-27-2007, 04:02 PM
dont wear that scarf in a pusher...

M_Gunz
04-27-2007, 04:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
Some of us have nothing to look forward to other than KotS. We only fly IL-2 because Red Baron's limitations became too much to handle, and we have no interest in BoB. Soon as KotS comes out we'll be gone thereto. "Good Riddance," will say some. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At the least, no big interest in BoB when a good WWI airwar sim is out.

I guess I will be using more of my HOTAS for view control once I no longer have to deal with
trim, flaps, CEM, etc. To which I say "whooo-hoooo!".

Blutarski2004
04-27-2007, 04:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I no longer have to deal with
trim, flaps, CEM, etc. To which I say "whooo-hoooo!". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... Let the congregation arise and deliver a hearty AMEN.

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 04:47 PM
Ah, but if IL-2 was any indicator we'll have to deal with choke, spark advance/******, and for the Camel magneto selectors? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

M_Gunz
04-27-2007, 04:59 PM
Aren't the magnetos how you blip the engines?

Two sliders and a button?

I just hope that the FM isn't cushy about stalls and makes flying IL2 biplanes look easy.

x6BL_Brando
04-27-2007, 06:17 PM
My kitbag is packed and loaded into the Crossley tender already ... I only await the call to arms

B

Tooz_69GIAP
04-27-2007, 09:11 PM
Definately looking forward to strapping into a SE5 and hunting down Pfalzs and Fokkers!! And of course, I'll be spending a lot of time in the DH.9 and Gotha. If it has bombs and more than one engine, I'll fly it!! But I'd love to see an Ilya Mourometz four engined job modelled!! First ever heavy bomber, first built and flown by the Russians in 1913 as a passenger liner, then converted to a bomber.

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 09:30 PM
I'm not sure what the real term is, Gunz. It's a rotary switch that selects how many cylinders fire on the Camel's engine for a single revolution; seven, nine, maybe down to five, I forget. I used to know how many settings it had based on talks with the pilot but it's been years. There were actual magneto switches on many of the birds, too, very similar to the ones on WWII panels. That's probably not a good name to describe the Camel's selector switch.

karost
04-27-2007, 09:42 PM
for the successful of IL-2 is invited people from many country to play online and start to meet each other at the forum.

but after FB release I ( IMHO ) feel FM in side FB was compromise to make a common play easy to join and happy. but that make a small group of hard core simmer feel bad. but they have no way out because there is no other sim/game to match a competetion.

I play GTR2 and I like the idea of this sim to provide driving school feature for player to learn how to play in a simulation mode not compromise.

so if Knights of the Sky will be the competitor of SOW that is a good news for the community and customers.

how ever FB/.../1946 still be a good online game to make me meet a lot of good friends in HL and play together with fun and happy.

S!

Blottogg
04-27-2007, 11:06 PM
I'm still downloading the video (it's chugging along at 37KB/s... it's late, all you others downloading should be out partying on a Friday night) but I'm looking forward to this one, too.

I don't know about using the game engine for other eras. Remember the limitations of the Il-2 engine (altitude, Mach effects, etc.) I don't think they're wasting resources modelling Mach for KotS either, though they may have left provisions for additional modeling modules to be added later.

As far as being simpler to control, there may be fixed gear and no flaps, but there's no brakes and little ground steering either. I wonder if wing-walkers will be modelled? And in addition to the other engine controls, wasn't mixture controlled by something like a needle valve? If all the engine controls are modelled, just keeping the engine running may be a challenge. Sign me up!

Blutarski2004
04-28-2007, 02:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blottogg:
I'm still downloading the video (it's chugging along at 37KB/s... it's late, all you others downloading should be out partying on a Friday night) but I'm looking forward to this one, too.

I don't know about using the game engine for other eras. Remember the limitations of the Il-2 engine (altitude, Mach effects, etc.) I don't think they're wasting resources modelling Mach for KotS either, though they may have left provisions for additional modeling modules to be added later.

As far as being simpler to control, there may be fixed gear and no flaps, but there's no brakes and little ground steering either. I wonder if wing-walkers will be modelled? And in addition to the other engine controls, wasn't mixture controlled by something like a needle valve? If all the engine controls are modelled, just keeping the engine running may be a challenge. Sign me up! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



..... Hello, Blottog. Glad you popped in.

IIRC, the D.Va required that the oil pump be manually re-pressurized by the pilot every 10 minutes of flight. Might be true of other planes powered by Mercedes in-lines as well.

Shades of I-16 landing gear .....

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 04:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karost:
for the successful of IL-2 is invited people from many country to play online and start to meet each other at the forum. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

S!

In 1998 my RB3D wingmate was Geier who lives in Sweden, and we were a pair! We were able to
fly loose deuce very successfully and in our very small squad called the twins.

We also were both on the Delphi FSF. RB3D had online with squads from all over. The top
Euro squad I knew then was IIRC PJ666.

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 04:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
I'm not sure what the real term is, Gunz. It's a rotary switch that selects how many cylinders fire on the Camel's engine for a single revolution; seven, nine, maybe down to five, I forget. I used to know how many settings it had based on talks with the pilot but it's been years. There were actual magneto switches on many of the birds, too, very similar to the ones on WWII panels. That's probably not a good name to describe the Camel's selector switch. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've seen old cars with choke on the dash and spark advance on the steering wheel before,
but that what you describe sounds like the distributor is up there as well!

Did you see that at Old Rhinebeck?

x6BL_Brando
04-28-2007, 05:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I've seen old cars with choke on the dash and spark advance on the steering wheel before </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My grandfather had a Daimler limousine from the early Twenties, with just that set-up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Mixture Rich to Lean, Spark Advance and ****** levers - and a huge horn-pushbutton right in the centre of the (wooden) steering wheel. It sounded like the Queen Mary leaving Southampton Dock.. lol.

I had always understood the rotaries to have just a simple cut-out button - at least on the Pup and the Camel - similar to the engine cut-out you find on a motorcycle. This was a simple current earthing device that isolated the magneto and stopped it from producing high tension current, I.e. sparks. The long stroke of the pistons means that the engine cycles up and down quite slowly and torque builds up slowly too. (Different from a modern engine which can go from 0 to 6 - 7,000 rpm with a flick of the key and a heavy foot!)

'Blipping' the switch then, meant just interrupting the sparks by earthing the mag, thereby cutting off combustion in all the cylinders. Multiple magnetos, controlling different cylinders must surely have been a refinement that came much later than the simple blip throttle?

A Clerget engine at RNAS Yeovilton

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/Clerget-small.jpg

x6BL_Brando
04-28-2007, 05:37 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif I just woke up!

I checked Wiki to find this about the Camel's motive power:

Engine variants

* With the Clerget engine, the crankshaft remained fixed while the cylinders and attached propellor rotated around it. The result of this torque was a significant "pull" to the right. In the hands of an experienced pilot, this characteristic could be exploited to give exceptional manoueverability in a dog-fight. The rate of turn to the right was twice that of a turn to the left.
* <span class="ev_code_RED">The Gnome engines</span> differed from the others in that a selector switch could cut the ignition to <span class="ev_code_RED">all but one of the cylinders</span> to reduce power for landing. (This was because rotary engines did not have throttles and were at full 'throttle' all the while the ignition was on) On the others the engine had to be "blipped" (turned off and on) using a <span class="ev_code_RED">control column-mounted ignition switch</span> , (blip switch) to reduce power sufficiently for a safe landing.

Here's the engine list for the Camel:

* 130 hp Clerget 9B Rotary (standard powerplant)
* 140 hp Clerget 9Bf Rotary
* 110 hp Le Rhone 9J Rotary
* 150 hp Bentley BR1 Rotary (gave best performance - standard for R.N.A.S. machines)
* 100 hp Gnome Monosoupape 9B-2 Rotary
* 150 hp Gnome Monosoupape 9N Rotary

I guess that, if patches and updates take the Ic route, we may have some pretty interesting times ahead http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B.

x6BL_Brando
04-28-2007, 06:04 AM
More from Yeovilton

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/Camel_4.jpg

And, slightly off topic, here's a scary one...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/brando6BL/Short_2.jpg

The remains of a wrecked seaplane, see the huge radiator above the in-line engine.

Then note the location of the cockpit behind the radiator! Like driving your car with a fridge-freezer mounted on the bonnet or what? 6DoF essential! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B

x6BL_Brando
04-28-2007, 09:48 AM
I found some good, descriptive words about air combat here. (http://www.acepilots.com/wwi/br_mccudden.html)

We were just on the point of engaging six Albatros Scouts away to our right, when we saw ahead of us, just above Poelcappelle, an S.E. half spinning down closely pursued by a silvery blue German triplane at very close range. The S.E. certainly looked very unhappy, so we changed our minds about attacking the six V-strutters, and went to the rescue of the unfortunate S.E...... Poor Voss

B

WWSpinDry
04-28-2007, 01:05 PM
(cross-posted from SimHQ)
Related to the taxi ops ...

At Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome I watched original and original-engined replicas of WWI aircraft taxi unassisted using only propwash and rudder. This included turning off the "runway" (really just a grass strip), heading towards a side fence, then stopping and turning full around to face away from the fence while quite close to it. All this without ground handlers or brakes. Even the Camel was able to do this, without a throttle (just a magneto selector for enabling only certain cylinders per revolution). There were no "cheats" like steerable tailwheels like you see on some replicas; these are all exact replicas if not outright originals.

It will be quite the test of your flight/atmosphere physics if your aircraft are capable of reproducing this ability.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 01:48 PM
For the authentic effects of rotary engines you also need to take a dose of laxatives during the mission. Pilots used to end up ingesting a fair amount of castor oil lubricants, helping to keep them 'regular'.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It will be quite the test of your flight/atmosphere physics if your aircraft are capable of reproducing this ability. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A test of our piloting ability too!

RaVe_N
04-28-2007, 02:30 PM
Hope it gets here soon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 02:41 PM
In the 1930 "Hells Angels" you can watch DVII's maneuver into place to form a starting line
and then taking off.

How many of those planes had a wheel at the tail anyway? My old models had skid sticks.

p-11.cAce
04-28-2007, 03:40 PM
Another side effect of the "blip" switches is that while they grounded the mags they did NOT interrupt the flow of fuel and oil to the engine - so all the unburned fuel and oil just sprayed out the exhausts and collected in the cowling. Blip too long or too often and you can imagine the result http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

WWSpinDry
04-28-2007, 03:44 PM
To my knowledge none of them had tailwheels; all fixed skids (I think a couple of designs were "sprung" to allow a bit of flexing).

On the Camel, it has more than one magneto setting. The pilot can very effectively control the engine RPMs by reducing the number of cylinders firing up or down as he goes; as I recall it's always an odd number going from (IIRC) five up to the total number (is it eleven? I really need to get back into this stuff). When the pilot was on final approach you could hear the firing rate change up and down the scale as he adjusted his descent rate until he cut it down to the bare minimum right before landing flare. Then he upped the number again to get enough propwash for taxi. It was quite the unique sound, and the settings gave a lot of flexibility in the amount of thrust; he didn't seem at all disadvantaged during flight or taxi ops by not having a throttle.

WWSpinDry
04-28-2007, 04:14 PM
Heh. Have I mentioned lately I'm looking forward to this sim coming out?

Just thought I'd establish that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Blottogg
04-28-2007, 10:59 PM
Here's a good clip of a Sopwith with a rotary engine starting up. Sopwith and Spitfire (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtprTL66-FY&mode=related&search=)

I remember reading/hearing something about adjusting the fuel flow/mixture with a needle valve, and how finicky it could be, but I can't find the reference at the moment. It may have been in reference to another engine, aircraft, or just senility kicking in. I though I remembered something about the blip switch being easier to use when landing than trying to dial a mixture and fine tune a throttle opening to set power, the idea being to set the throttle opening and fuel flow to settings you knew worked before landing, then reducing power as needed with the blip switch. Less risk of ham-handing the engine while on final.

leitmotiv
04-29-2007, 01:34 AM
I am looking forward to this item.

M_Gunz
04-29-2007, 05:13 PM
Is there any way to translate the KoTS forum?

WWSpinDry
04-29-2007, 05:50 PM
Loverly film, Blotto, thanks for the link!

M_Gunz
04-30-2007, 03:04 AM
BTW, Spinny check yer PM's.

WWSpinDry
04-30-2007, 07:13 AM
Back atcha.