Airframe and wing weaknesses.

S

Siggi

Guest
Are the airframe and wing weaknesses of certain a/c modelled, or can one throw the Bebe and Albatross etc around with gay abandon?

Just be nice to know beforehand, so one can fly accordingly. :)
 
Oh bah! Half the fun of WW1 flightsims is finding stuff out the hard way, just like they had to do in real life. So go out there and push things as hard as the situation calls for and see what happens :jump:
 
take a new pilot, fly in QC in an N17, take the crate up to lets say 6-7000 ft and point the nose at the deck....pull out when you bottle it ;)

try that a few times and you'll have your [LINESTRIKE]lawn dart[/LINESTRIKE] answer lol!
 
Bullethead said:
, just like they had to do in real life. So go out there and push things as hard as the situation calls for and see what happens :jump:
Click to expand...

Hmm- not too well said, but I think I know what you meant.:)

However, I'm sure that in real life, they asked how far planes could be pushed and took note of what those in the know said, to use as a guideline.
I don't think the advice was "go out there and push things as hard as the situation calls for and see what happens" :)
 
Indeed, they're being a bit hard on a new chap. Well, the old mater is sending me some cake, and they jolly well shan't have any if they're not careful.
 
When you left "warnings" on, you should get a warning, saying, that you overstressed the airframe (don't know the exact text). That comes short before the plane breaks up. So, you should change your action immediately.
Was reliable on the Albatros so far - never lost a wing.

I wouldn't say it's cheating - the real life pilot would have noticed wing warping and shaking and trembling and shreaking noises etc.
 
I'd prefer audible cues, I'll have no truck with text appearing on my windscreen.
 
Siggi

From some of the reports I have read from WW1, if you were in trouble and it was either a choice of staying within the recommended limits of the aircraft and definately being shot down/killed or taking the aircraft beyond the limits and possibly averting death some pilots exceeded the recommended limits.

I know what I would do in a situation of either definate death or risking it all on a "flip of the coin" between life and death.

Thanks
Rugbyfan1972
 
Rugbyfan1972 said:
Siggi

From some of the reports I have read from WW1, if you were in trouble and it was either a choice of staying within the recommended limits of the aircraft and definately being shot down/killed or taking the aircraft beyond the limits and possibly averting death some pilots exceeded the recommended limits.

I know what I would do in a situation of either definate death or risking it all on a "flip of the coin" between life and death.

Thanks
Rugbyfan1972
Click to expand...

Absolutely. But in RB one could hear when one was taxing the airframe rather too much and it was often a life-saver. Other times a wing would come adrift regardless. I do believe I managed to get down alive more than once with a missing wing (upper deck on the DR1 it might have been, possibly an Alb).
 
Yeah, I seem to recall regularly flying home in an RB3d monoplane Camel:whistle:
Cheers,
shredward
 
My (late) French pilot can attest that the Bebe has its notorious airframe weakness well modeled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top