-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Craig and Matt's Sopwith Camel Released 12th
- Thread starter MDIvey
- Start date
Bomber_12th
SOH-CM-2025
Very nice Jeansy! Both the paint scheme and the screenshot look great.
Speaking of the Sopwith Camel and takeoff, all of the pilot reports I have read (and the videos show it), the aircraft usually surprises first-time Camel pilots, by just how fast it wants to get off the ground. With this aircraft in FSX (same as with the Neoqb Dr.1), I like to keep some down stick, keeping the aircraft on the ground a bit longer, and not letting it fly off until the torque effect is lowered (which happens in FSX as the aircraft gets faster). In the pilot report that Pips posted a couple of pages back, it mentions the surprise of finding the aircraft taking off at 35 mph, and after a takeoff run of no more than 150 ft.
This is some great footage of the Brooklands Museum's le Clerget powered Sopwith Camel, when being flown in the late 80's. If I recall, most Camels during WWI were powered by le Clerget engines (which the sounds and throttle setup that come with Craig and Matt's Camel matches), and would have sounded and responded as this one does in the video. Note that, in this video, you can hear the blip switch being used for landing and taxi (despite the fact that le Clerget's and other rotary engines had a more/less conventional throttle, unlike the Gnome). Note also how slow the aircraft lands, and how fast it comes to a stop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxO-co1ezGM
I don't believe the Brooklands Camel has flown for a while, but it was on display at Old Warden last year, where it was given some engine runs for the crowd (as shown in the video below). Note that the le Clerget engines, and other throttled rotary engines, have perhaps a more 'refined' sound than the Gnome's, as these videos of this le Clerget powered Camel illustrate (compared to those that you can find of the Old Rhinebeck and Vintage Aviator Camels). Leaving everything as is with Craig and Matt's Camel (save perhaps for dropping the Hp from 160 down to 130), it comes very accurate to depicting a le Clerget powered Camel (for its throttle, sound, and engine setup (if, as I say, the Hp is dropped to 130)). With this engine, as with the Bentley's and le Rhone's, you have more/less smooth power changes, rather than the switching back and forth between different numbers of cylinders firing as you do with the Gnome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knfADySOEL0
Speaking of the Sopwith Camel and takeoff, all of the pilot reports I have read (and the videos show it), the aircraft usually surprises first-time Camel pilots, by just how fast it wants to get off the ground. With this aircraft in FSX (same as with the Neoqb Dr.1), I like to keep some down stick, keeping the aircraft on the ground a bit longer, and not letting it fly off until the torque effect is lowered (which happens in FSX as the aircraft gets faster). In the pilot report that Pips posted a couple of pages back, it mentions the surprise of finding the aircraft taking off at 35 mph, and after a takeoff run of no more than 150 ft.
This is some great footage of the Brooklands Museum's le Clerget powered Sopwith Camel, when being flown in the late 80's. If I recall, most Camels during WWI were powered by le Clerget engines (which the sounds and throttle setup that come with Craig and Matt's Camel matches), and would have sounded and responded as this one does in the video. Note that, in this video, you can hear the blip switch being used for landing and taxi (despite the fact that le Clerget's and other rotary engines had a more/less conventional throttle, unlike the Gnome). Note also how slow the aircraft lands, and how fast it comes to a stop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxO-co1ezGM
I don't believe the Brooklands Camel has flown for a while, but it was on display at Old Warden last year, where it was given some engine runs for the crowd (as shown in the video below). Note that the le Clerget engines, and other throttled rotary engines, have perhaps a more 'refined' sound than the Gnome's, as these videos of this le Clerget powered Camel illustrate (compared to those that you can find of the Old Rhinebeck and Vintage Aviator Camels). Leaving everything as is with Craig and Matt's Camel (save perhaps for dropping the Hp from 160 down to 130), it comes very accurate to depicting a le Clerget powered Camel (for its throttle, sound, and engine setup (if, as I say, the Hp is dropped to 130)). With this engine, as with the Bentley's and le Rhone's, you have more/less smooth power changes, rather than the switching back and forth between different numbers of cylinders firing as you do with the Gnome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knfADySOEL0
dandog
Charter Member
My bad, pilot error. After watching video's of Camels, I realize that using more forward stick and extending the ground roll to the six second mark makes for a very smooth and controlled take-off. It just wants to leap off the ground in a heart beat. Possible, but not suggested.
Daniel
Daniel
warchild
Charter Member
warchild
Charter Member
dandog
Charter Member
Hello. I tried to fly up to Lukla, but couldn't get over 9500 ft. I took off from Lukla, but immediately fell to 95200 ft. I was under the impression that the service ceiling was 21000 ft. Lukla is listed at 10,000 ft. I leaned and did what I could. What did I miss? Currently chalking it up to pilot error.
Daniel
ps. tried to fly from St. Juliana to St Barths, but just couldn't finesse a landing at St. Barths. Deffinatey pilot error.
Daniel
ps. tried to fly from St. Juliana to St Barths, but just couldn't finesse a landing at St. Barths. Deffinatey pilot error.
warchild
Charter Member
You didnt miss anything Daniel.. For the 170 hp Le Rhone Engine the service ceiling is 21000 feet.. Should take about thirty minutes to climb there.. Mind you though, the Allies didnt use oxygen. That was a German invention. However I digress.. We tested the plane up through 10000 feet too what we thought "get the lift right" . You should reach 10000 feet after approx. 10 minutes.. 15000 feet after 17 minutes. technically however 15000 feet should be as high as you can go without oxygen. Above that, you start to experience hypoxia rather quickly. Of course they didnt know a lot about that at the time..
truthfully, we didnt test to max altitude because of the amount of time it takes to get that high, and the fact that most flying in this plane was done between 5000 and 10000 feet.. .
We'll go back and run some more tests and should it require it we'll release an update to correct the lift. I promise..
Pam
Bomber_12th
SOH-CM-2025
I don't know if it was the cause or not of the problem, Daniel (it wouldn't have been, if you don't have it installed), but on a recent flight I discovered a fault with the way in which I had the most recent blip switch gauge coded. With the most recent blip switch gauge, it makes it so that the mixture is either 'full rich' or 'off', and when you try to lean the mixture manually, the mixture lever will just go back to either setting, depending on the state of the 'blip switch' key.
Modifying it once more, in this blip switch gauge code, it's the same as the last, but I have reverted back to the method of the fuel being turned on/off when using the blip switch, as I had originally, but this time it works just as well as my last gauge. Now you'll have full control over the mixture. Having just tested it out, I was flying at 12,000 ft, with the mixture leaned, just aft of the middle position, and was maintaining 1200 RPM (the engine produces 1300 RPM at sea level).
Modifying it once more, in this blip switch gauge code, it's the same as the last, but I have reverted back to the method of the fuel being turned on/off when using the blip switch, as I had originally, but this time it works just as well as my last gauge. Now you'll have full control over the mixture. Having just tested it out, I was flying at 12,000 ft, with the mixture leaned, just aft of the middle position, and was maintaining 1200 RPM (the engine produces 1300 RPM at sea level).
kremin
SOH-CM-2025
Thanks John............looking forward to the Gnome sounds..........
best regards
Rick Canham
South Australia
Must try V4, but I find that in the approach using V3, the engine stops completely & needs a restart....so have changed to using F1 or F4 (throttle cut/throttle full).
Modified FDE good for the elev trim, only need 4 clicks nose down, but admit that I also use aileron trim (ctrl+6/ctrl+4) to ease the aileron load. Could try increasing the roll to rudder factor I suppose? Although in the field I suspect the riggers would have twisted the wings with the flying & landing wires??
Still having fun trying to master the beast in calm weather.......how about windy turbulent stuff!!
Would like to find a way of getting torque effect with power max or min....difficult I should think within the limitations of FS - have tried with little success increasing the prop MOI.
Thanks Pam for a nice FDE & the boys for a fine model.
Keith
Modified FDE good for the elev trim, only need 4 clicks nose down, but admit that I also use aileron trim (ctrl+6/ctrl+4) to ease the aileron load. Could try increasing the roll to rudder factor I suppose? Although in the field I suspect the riggers would have twisted the wings with the flying & landing wires??
Still having fun trying to master the beast in calm weather.......how about windy turbulent stuff!!
Would like to find a way of getting torque effect with power max or min....difficult I should think within the limitations of FS - have tried with little success increasing the prop MOI.
Thanks Pam for a nice FDE & the boys for a fine model.
Keith
warchild
Charter Member
Paul ran some tests yesterday.. He was able to get it to 15000 feet in around 17 minutes.. it wasnt exact, and it wasnt perfect, but it was close.. I'm not sure of where the lift problem for some folks is coming in. i'd really like to understand it though as Paul and I have two machines so diametrically opposite each other it takes three months to get them both to fly the same way after a minor change in the config file. If anyone could offer insight into these problems, please do feel free to tell us..
Thanks
Pam
Thanks
Pam
warchild
Charter Member
:
: I'll be honest.. Thats why i never took it up that high.. i'm gettin old and i dont know that i have that long to live ::lol::..besides, unlike other aircraft, the one thing i noticed ( for those with extreme fears of heights like i have ) is that as you get higher and higher in this bird, the more you come to realize just how tiny and vulnerable you are. Its really scary for me, even in a simulator.. Weird huh??
warchild
Charter Member
Bone..
Your not alone.. I consider myself to be the worlds laziest pilot. Set the trim and let the plane fly while i admire the scenery.. Theres so much more to this plane though that for me makes up for the loss of trim that its become rather addicting.. really, i'd rather fly this than my big pretty 737. when i land ( if i land instead of collide with the ground ) I walk away with a greater sense of satisfaction and accomplishment.. Silly i know, but true..
