Strategic Retreat wrote on Apr 11^th, 2012 at 6:28pm:


Pilots of the RFC weren’t allowed to have Parachutes; the Top Brass thought it would induce cowardice.

German Fliers however were allowed Parachutes but many chose not to have them, not because they thought it was cowardly but because they were very heavy.

In those days, taking the guns off a fighter could increase its performance by 10-20 mph so pilots wanted as little extra weight as possible.

It should also be noted that Balloon Observers on both sides were issued with Parachutes.

andy190 wrote on Apr 11^th, 2012 at 8:53pm:


Some idiots people with too much military power and zero field experience should learn to speak only after having gone a dozen mission themselves.

Really hate the kind of "top brass" like that.

And there's a reason for that personal hatred. I served, in my time, into the Army, and we DID have a lot of idiots people like those here, with too high a military grade and a too low a IQ, back then... and somehow I doubt the trend has changed any significantly ever since 1988. The kind of idiots people, to make myself clear, who think that the phrase "Lead, and I'll follow" can be uttered only while referring to a pub.


andy190 wrote on Apr 11^th, 2012 at 8:53pm:


This I didn't know. Thought it was a very generalized idea of chivalry in air battles. That the <expletive deleted> at the top used to forbid it in some Air Forces while in others were allowed by forward thinking men, I had no idea.


Bass wrote on Apr 12^th, 2012 at 7:59am:


Well, yes, the planes built around the engines had their own quirks, and the quirks of the engine only worsened the situation.

ALL the very aerobatic performance capable prop planes of today are NOT comparable to a Cessna 182, under the point of view od a calm and serene flight, and back then the delta between simple recreational planes and aerobatic and/or military fighter planes was even larger.


Bass wrote on Apr 12^th, 2012 at 7:59am:


Would you care to reword the above quoted, please?

What I understood of the first part is that you believe RoF not to be easy, and here I can believe you, and M$ Flight to be EVEN MORE difficult... thing that leave me like this:

The second part... you mean you have a Sopwith Camel with no armament, and only can shoot from a revolver? I thought the era of revolver and rifles on board to shoot to other planes ended WITH the introducing of the Sopwith Camel and its synchronized Vickers, on that front of the war, if not even before.

Bass wrote on Apr 13^th, 2012 at 7:47am:


Oh God...

Leaving humility in its scabbard for this time, I am among the most pluri-decorated aces of the various virtual campaigns in the Second Wordl War staged in the various CFS over simulated Europe and the Pacific both, and even piloted a Camel or three in Red Baron, never to the extent to make a name for myself though. My favorite plane remains the P-51D Mustang, followed closely by the P-47 Thunderbolt...

Let me ask you a question: Do YOU have any inkling of HOW a air combat is done?

A revolver to shoot behind you?

Manfred von Richthofen is twisting in his grave at this statement of yours. And with him a lot of his comrades and even his allies' foe pilots.

First rule: Never allow an enemy to get your Six 'o Clock. Or above you, for that.

Second rule: putting YOURSELF at your enemy's Six 'o Clock, and/or above him, is PARAMOUNT.

Third rule: should your enemy try to put himself at your Six 'o Clock or try to get the drop on you, you MUST not allow it and MUST at least try to retaliate trying to do exact same thing to him.

Fourth rule: train yourself in the fine art of the deflected shot. Bullets take a certain time to reach a target, and you must lead the other plane, when shooting from its side. If you shoot at its shape, the bullets will never reach their intended target. How much you must lead the other plane in such a situation depends on speed (yours, your enemy's and the one of the bullets), distance and winds. Make a good use of tracers, is the only valid suggestion I can give you here.

There are other rules, mind, but in a dogfight within the reality simulated by a computer, their usefulness is most of the times doubtful.

WHY do you think aerobatic combat maneuvers are made in the air between two fighting planes? To give an amusing airmanship show to the soldiers in the trenches, perhaps?

Of course, the rules of aerial combat changed a bit between the two wars, but I'm quite sure only someone BEGGING to be shot down, back in the first world war, would have tried to shoot behind his fighter plane with a revolver, of all things

The problem with this approach to self defense of yours has two glaring weak spots:

First, and most important, revolvers are NOT machine guns. They are, as a rule, low powered when dealing with anti-material roles. Even today's Magnum series or the famed Desert Eagle .50 do not measure up with machine guns fire. They have about 50 meters of useful range and bad effectiveness against a plane, and back in those time there were no Magnum the like of today's, so cut the range off of at least 10 meters and dial WAY down any amount damage to any plane... THEN you must consider that your slow and almost spent bullets, if caught at the end of their range, almost assuredly were batted away from your enemy's propeller like an annoying fly, or stopped dead by the glass of your enemy's cockpit's wind deflector, or the metal of his rotating engine's casing, or even the rotating engine heads... you should have been SO LUCKY that a bullet from your revolver COULD have SLIGHTLY DENTED the radiator of a water cooled engine powered fighter, IF EVEN THAT.

All in all, unless you have the MASSIVE (here it would have been the ideal place for a slang expression in my language which meaning sadly would be lost in translation, so I'll refrain, writing instead...) STROKE OF LUCK that one of those slow and almost spent bullet would be able to cut one of your enemy wing tiers, thing that would amount to a miracle in and for itself, you're wasting your time, especially because of what is explained in the following paragraph.

Second, to shoot behind you, giving attention enough at what you do to avoid hitting your tail and trying to center a distant, almost assuredly out of range for a handgun enemy plane, you must leave the yoke unattended, giving your enemy MORE EASE at centering your six of clock and stuff your plane full of hot lead (if you're lucky) or, my favorites in those cases, incendiary rounds (if you are NOT lucky).

Forget the puny revolver in the holster. This not being a cowboys' shootout, it just doesn't measure up to the task. Full stop. Your BEST choice is to keep sharp situational awareness, and should an enemy try to take your Six, you MUST prevent that to happen at any cost and align your enemy with your machine guns' line of fire FIRST.

ALWAYS!

Strategic Retreat wrote on Apr 13^th, 2012 at 11:37am:


Holy macro. Thats a lesson to a "first timer" flying combat. 

If you dont understand "first timer", then i must make a new rule:
Seventh Rule: Keep allways humor intact! 

"At the moment at least, it seems no two-seaters are available under RoF, so it's a little redundant... maybe in anticipation of a future new AI plane... but for now... Tongue"

You are so wrong! Why state something you dont know about?

I dont take anything personal, maybe i would, if i got a affront attack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_Flight:_The_First_Great_Air_War

Quote:


Are you calling the Airco D.H.1 & D.H.2 "doubtful experiments"?

In 1915 they were some of the planes that ended the Fokker Scourge.