WW1

[R 105]

 Here is some general weight information on the Fokker D.VII Empty  Wt. 1.540 LB. Loaded Wt. 1.875 LB. Speed with the Mercedes 170hp D.III motor is 116mph. I think this is the plane we have in AH or close to it. Even if the top speed of the DR.1 was 102 the D.VII should still be able to dive way and get some separation from the DR.1.

 The DR.1 is too fast in AH if the information I see is right. I see speeds for the DR.1 from 86mph to 102 so who knows what information was used to model it. All I know is all these planes seem to fly the same speed in AH WWI arena. Only the maneuverability of the DR.1 makes the difference in the fights. I am sorry the WWI arena didn't have more success because I like WWI air combat.  By the way nice work on the maps USRanger.

[Anaxogoras]

The AH D.VII seems to match the performance (speed/climb times) of a captured O.A.W built D.IIIau powered D.VII tested by the French. Mercedes D.IIIa powered D.VIIs were overall very early production rarities when looking at the total production.

One thing that might limit the performance of the AH's D.VII is its weight which correctly matches the captured O.A.W -built machine but it also seems significantly higher than the weights of the D.VII's from other manufacturers/production batches. I don't know what made them heavier nor am I completely certain about the exact weight distribution (ie. where the extra weight comes from/how the weights figures are usually listed). I need to do more research on that.

That is surprising because I wouldn't expect a D.IIIau powered D.VII's best TAS to be at sea level.  On the other hand, it's hard to know how representative a captured aircraft is.  Engines wore out quickly, and if the captured machine was in a bad state, then even the higher quality Entente fuel would not give an accurate impression of the aircraft in its factory state.

Here is a thread that has original test data for the D.IIIau.

http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/aircraft/48085-production-numbers-mercedes-diii-series-13.html

[Wmaker]

That is surprising because I wouldn't expect a D.IIIau powered D.VII's best TAS to be at sea level.  

I've been wondering the same thing myself but that is what the test showed...it still keeps the speed roughly equal to sea level performance until 1000m is reached. I know the problem with captured aircraft in general, just mentioned the fact that AH's performance seems to agree with that test. The French report on the plane can be found from the Windsock's Fokker D.VII Anthology #2. Here's a thread discussing about the said plane/test: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/aircraft/44760-fokker-d-vii-no-2009-presumably-tested-allies.html

On the other hand, the rpm at all out level in AH shows 1400rpm which would suggest to a D.IIIa. I've understood from the British testing of an D.IIIau that it ran ~1600rpm all out at level.

[Anaxogoras]

Thanks for sharing that.  Following the thread, it seems hardly certain that D.VII had a D.IIIau, and even if it did, there were questions about how the engine was tuned and the fuel that was used.  It's a very familiar story for WW1 aircraft data, I'm afraid.

Btw, RoF's D.VII is modeled from data with a regular D.IIIa engine (from the Adlershof trials, iirc), and it is faster at altitude than the one we have here in AH.

[Tinribs]

Got some better trench textures to use now.  The T.E. has a trench object, but I like these better because they are bigger with more variety.  The object only comes in one shape.  Work has begun.

I liked the first trenches but I like these even more.

Nice one USRanger 

Any chance of some better tree cover for hiding under when things get rough? I like to land nearby and have a smoke when the furball's going badly, but I keep getting shot at parked out in the open.

Probably not.......the original ww1 arena looked like Sherwood Forest until I crashed into them all.

[Wmaker]

Following the thread, it seems hardly certain that D.VII had a D.IIIau, and even if it did, there were questions about how the engine was tuned and the fuel that was used.  It's a very familiar story for WW1 aircraft data, I'm afraid.

Rgr, it's a long time since I've read the thread myself. There are some old digitized Flight Journals that have an article on the D.IIIau which was taken from a captured Albatros D.Va where they got only around 160hp out of it using normal settings (ie. not using higher alt throttle at sea level). I do realize with the little reading I've done on the subject that it really needs quite bit of studying to get the big picture here and even then there will be a boat load of unanswered questions. It can be a complex subject.

[Tinribs]

I’m all for adding some new planes to the WWI arena.  That can never hurt. However, while I think it would create a temporary bump in interest, I don’t think it would solve the fundamental problem.  I think the WWI arena needs some strategic game-play more like the WWII MA.  If the current WWI Arena is left for furballing and a WWI MA is added, that’s fine with me.  However, WWI pilots should have access to some semblance of the depth of game-play that the WWII players have.  I think this could be started with a modest amount of effort.


I’d like to see a field layout similar to:
(I suck at drawing.  Ideally these should be exactly spaced evenly and the circles should just be touching....)
(Image removed from quote.)

I’d guess fields would be ~12 miles apart.  

Fields have light ack.  They should be protected with aircraft.

Hangars are destroyable. (Standard rebuild times.)

Each field is associated with a nearby command post (instead of town). With some 17lbs gun emplacements, a light ack, and a tethered observation balloon

(Image removed from quote.)

that functions as field dar.  There is no country dar.

The current plane-set would be allowed to carry 2 x 20lbs bombs.  The F2B maybe should carry 4 x 20lbs.  

(Image removed from quote.)

Each country would have access to a single model of tank:

(Image removed from quote.)

and a troop truck:

(Image removed from quote.)

These vehicles spawn from a field vehicle hangar into the no-man’s zone.  They will fight their way towards an enemy field.  If the defenses are suppressed and the troop truck gets close enough to release its cargo of commando’s, they can capture the command post and the associated airfield changes ownership.

Is this absolutely historically accurate?  No.  But no less than P-51 vs. P-51 vs. P-51 in a 3-way WWII MA.  Scenarios are where historical accuracy can rule.  The MA needs fun game-play.  What the modest changes would do is give a structure and purpose to the fighting.  It would give a framework on which to hang the action.  A context.  Goal-Oriented-Combat.


With these limited changes I think we could greatly improve the WWI arena experience and give it a depth of game-play that some of those ~450 WWII MA players that occasionally visit the WWI arena might find interesting enough to visit more often.  If 1/4 of those decided to come play regularly,  a WWI MA would rock.  

Regards,
Wab

As an addition to Wabs most excellent plan Id like to see a few bases at the edges of the map where players could go for a discrete 1v1 or some flight/squad training.

[R 105]

 As few folks that play in the WWI arena a 1v1 so not a problem at this time. What I would like to see is something that may revive the WWI arena. I don't know what that would be be for sure but a few ideas like the map changes and an objective could help. I don't see HTC spending to many more resources developing more aircraft until we see enough folks to make it worth while.

 I would like to see an Albatros D.Va the Spad XIII and the Sopwith Dolphin but I won't until attendance is way up from what it is now. I wish I had a brilliant plan the fix this over night but that ain't the case. Maybe start with the wings on the D.VII and the speed of the DR.1 so it is just not a place to get killed by the DR.1 or a balloon or two to shoot at.

 I see guys in there that can fly any of the four planes in the set well. What I am talking about is the guy that just stops in WWI to check it out and gets whacked 4 or 5 times right off the bat by a DR.1 and don't come back again. For the guys like USRanger who are working on things in WWI, thank you and keep up the good work <S>.

[Anaxogoras]

I would like to see an Albatros D.Va.

Don't bother with that aircraft unless the Camel is slowed down to the "British Camel" figures (similar for the Dr1).  Otherwise it's dead meat.

[Sid]

I'd like to see the planes we have now "fixed" before introducing any more, but when it comes to new planes; I agree with Anaxogoras regarding the Albatros D.Va.

Any reason we can't have both the British Camel and French Camel? (minimal work to introduce).

But if there are two planes crying out to be added, they are the:

The Spad S.XIII



The S.XIII was flown by famous French fighter pilots such as Georges Guynemer and Rene Fonck, and also by Italian ace Francesco Baracca. Aces of the United States Army Air Service who flew the Spad XIII include Eddie Rickenbacker (America's leading ace with 26 confirmed victories) and Frank Luke (18 victories).


The S.E.5a



Many of the top Allied aces flew this fighter including Billy Bishop, Andrew Beauchamp-Proctor, Cecil Lewis, Edward Mannock and James McCudden. Legendary British ace Albert Ball was initially disparaging of the S.E.5 but in the end claimed 17 of his 44 victories flying it.

[R 105]

 Yep I agree fix what we got now both the Camel and the DR.1 are way too fast and the D.VII has a wing problem. Then if we can't get enough things changed to draw a better crowd then we can worry about new planes. I mentioned the Albatros only because it was one of the most produced German planes of the war and I like its looks too. I was surprised not to have seen it or the Spad as one of the first planes in the game.

[Anaxogoras]

The Albatros D.Va was a fine machine.  However, its reputation seems to have been forever tainted by MVR and his complaints when the D.V failed to offer improvement over the D.III.  With the 180hp Mercedes D.IIIa engine, the D.Va was a reasonably fast fighter that was easy to fly, and it was retained at the front line when the Dr1 was retired.  Its major weakness was the stupid v-strut design that was copied from the Nieuport fighters, and so there was a danger of wing failure if the pilot dived too fast and too steeply.  But it was still able to run away and dive away from more maneuverable fighters like the Sopwith Camel.  In combat with the D.Va, Camel pilots estimated that turn rates were about equal to the left, but that they could turn 3 circles to the right in the time the D.Va could make 2.  On the other hand, the Spad13 and SE5a were both faster, climbed better, and could dive faster; those two fighters have my vote as the finest Entente fighters of WW1.

Anyway, by the time we get to mid-1918, the period represented in Aces High, the D.Va was a second string fighter (even after it was upgraded to the Mercedes D.IIIau).  Some units continued to be partially equipped with it all the way to the armistice.

[R 105]

 The spad VIII would out class any other plane in the game at this time. It had a speed of 134mph. I think in may have been the most produced allied fight of the war I think I read about 8400 were built. All the variants of the Albatros had to put it at the top of German production. I think about 2000 Albatros DIII were made and the Albatros D.Va had about 3000 built. But I ain't hold out a lot of hope of seeing new planes in the WWI arena.

[Sid]

Got some better trench textures to use now.  The T.E. has a trench object, but I like these better because they are bigger with more variety.  The object only comes in one shape.  Work has begun.

Any news on your fantastic looking terrain Sir?

[USRanger]

Very close to finished.  Posted a pic in the TE forum last night.