Did a massive career purge and re-roll on multiple careers and for the first time I have a American career in August 1918 with a Spad XIII. Have flown the Spad VII in several British careers in the past but I never kept at it as I didn’t like the cockpit view...or lack of.
Never flown a Spad XIII before (that I recall) so, going by pilot accounts, I wondered: Anyone ever tear the wings off a XIII in a dive? Historical pilots never seemed to worry about it (or so they recorded) so I was wondering.
I haven't flown SPADs much but they are robust! I've never pulled a wing off even after trying! Evidently the aileron crank mechanism added a measure of 'mass balance' to the ailerons. This is reported to be partly responsible for the wings not self destructing in high speed dives, i.e., aileron flutter initiating the process. Another factor is the two spar two bay strut design with attendant bracing. Even another is high rib count which add to structural integrity. There are other 'guesses' and reasons but I cannot remember them.
Did a massive career purge and re-roll on multiple careers and for the first time I have a American career in August 1918 with a Spad XIII. Have flown the Spad VII in several British careers in the past but I never kept at it as I didn’t like the cockpit view...or lack of.
Never flown a Spad XIII before (that I recall) so, going by pilot accounts, I wondered: Anyone ever tear the wings off a XIII in a dive? Historical pilots never seemed to worry about it (or so they recorded) so I was wondering.
I tried also to rip wings off no luck and when I landed to fast and crashed into a fence hardly any damage and my pilot was fine lol.
Fences vere softened and cushioned since WOFF2, I think? Thanks God, otherwise my pilots would be very shortliving . Regarding wing rip of SPAD I can not make any comments because I do not like to fly crates where I can not see anything outside.
This is one of my very few remaining gripes about WOFF: the extremely limited view of the Spad. This bugs me for a number of reasons. First, the actual airfoil of the top wing is quite thin. Yet in the sim, the top wing looks as thick as a redwood tree! Now, before anyone gets too excited, I understand that several factors go into the view the pilot has from the cockpit, and that the thinness or thickness of the airfoil may be less important than the height of the wing above the cockpit, the angle of the wing from the perspective of the pilot, etc. Still, the view from the cockpit shouldn't remind one of the view you get from the firing slit in a pillbox!
Although I have read of some contemporary complaints about the more limited view in the Spad as compared to some other planes, I am unaware of any pilot that refused to fly the Spad solely due to the limited view. Another consideration is the overall success of the Spad VII and XIII during the war. Surely, a plane with such a limited view in real life would a) not be very successful and b) be quickly withdrawn from service and replaced with a better aircraft.
One more comment, this time regarding gameplay balance and the Spad. There were very few "boom and zoom" fighters in the Great war and in WOFF. Why reduce this total even more by effectively eliminating the Spad from play due to the limited view? I mean, is there anyone who plays WOFF who actually enjoys dogfighting in the Spad?
Please be aware that I am NOT calling for an unrealistic or cartoon version here. Just a difference of an inch or two in terms of view would certainly be enough. It can still have the most restricted view of any plane in WOFF--just not quite as restricted as the one we have now. In turn, having a Spad that isn't such a pain to fly would open up a whole new avenue of play for many people who have otherwise avoided flying the plane, without sacrificing much, if anything, to historical accuracy.
Finally, I know that my plea is unlikely to be answered, at least at any time soon. But if there is anyone, and I mean anyone, who can satisfy my request, I would be forever in your debt.
[/rant]
“With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable.”
I have seen that. In fact, it is from the Spad XIII at the Dayton Air Force Museum, which I have also been to on several occasions.
One thing I would note, however. The view is designed not so much as to give a good idea of the view outside of the cockpit, as it is to give a good view of the instruments that can be seen inside the cockpit.
Last edited by BuckeyeBob; 04/12/1805:48 PM.
“With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable.”
#4416042 - 04/12/1806:05 PMRe: Anyone ever tear the wings off a Spad XIII?
[Re: ArisFuser]
Very cool, but as BB notes, the head position for viewing appears to be very low in the cockpit so as to get a good view of the inside of the cockpit as opposed to what the pilot can see. That said, maybe there are good pics around somewhere that show what the view looked like. Where are our resident geniuses on this kind of subject? JFM and the like? Perhaps they know.
I must confess, the view of the Spads are so limited I do refuse to even attempt to fly them. That said, I never flew them in ROF either for the same reason, so mabe it is accurate. I would be the last to know.
From the pic alone..it looks like the devs got the view right. The top wing looks pretty fat in the pilots face and there is less than a heads height between the guns and the top wing. If it's not accurate in the sim, seems like it still sucked pretty bad in real life.
Here's my take on the SPAD's view. Not part of OT and it's crazy, but hear me out. Here's a side view of the bird, where you can see that the top of the windscreen is a little below that fuel line from the tank above.
Now, the default view from the cockpit:
You can see the top of windscreen is higher than the fuel line. I'm thinking the eye level is too low. So, what happens when the eye level is raised?
A bit overdone, but the view improves immensely in my opinion. Crazy, huh?
"Take the cylinder out of my kidneys, The connecting rod out of my brain, my brain, From out of my arse take the camshaft, And assemble the engine again."
We can look at moving the view up sometime. It's set to the height of the average pilot and placed over the eye position of our pilot figure, which is designed to be approx average size/height. People are not all the same height of course. Moving it up will make it easier to see over the top wing, but aiming will likely be harder unless you drop lower to see through the sight, or use the F6 gunsight.
The wing is very thin, the padding next to your face isn't.
As that video link above shows, we have it about right or even too high for two of those guys at least.
Thank you Fullofit, for the pictures. Your second and third pictures really highlight what I am talking about. If you look closely at the photo of George Guynemer, it appears to me that he can at least see the tip of the spinner and a fair bit of sky above the wing. Currently in WOFF, without adjusting the view as you did in the second screenshot, you can't see any sky above the wing. This makes it virtually impossible to dogfight effectively in the Spad in WOFF. Without trying to belabor the point too much, I don't think this would have been tolerable in the real war.
Pol, thank you for the explanation and your willingness to at least consider this issue at some point in the future. Your customer support is second to none, in any field! In the meantime, I will try to adjust my eye level position in order to improve my view from the Spad cockpit.
“With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable.”