Quote:
Originally posted by *Buzzsaw*:
Quote:
On the bright side, it didn't kill more of its pilots than enemy
Man you huns never stop with the propaganda do you... :rolleyes:

By the way, the Snipe had a much better acceleration than the Camel, and had far better performance at higher altitudes. It`s top speed was nearly 20 mph faster.
True on the acceleration and true on the high alt performance, but 20 MPH faster?

I have top sea level speeds of 118 for the Camel and about 127 for the Snipe, for what it's worth. And to be blunt, what it's worth isn't a hell of a lot.

In the end I really don't give a damn. I know well in adveance that you will be howling about the performance of Allied planes no matter what it is. You will then proceed to cherry pick facts to support your forgone conclusion and back said facts with all manneer of interesting graphs :rolleyes: .

All the while you will ignore the most important fact of all: there is no definitive answer as to what the performance of these planes really was. WWI aircraft had wildly different performance ranges within a specific type depending on the age and condition of the airframe, age and condition of the engine, field mods, etc. etc. etc. Further, many commonly quoted figures on performance are based on wildly different test conditions. Finally, we don't have any originals left that can or would be flown the way that they were 85 years ago.

If I get a game where the SPAD is fast, the DRI can climb, and the D.VII is excellent but not the in all parameters and easy to fly then I'll be happy from a performance PoV. If the game further captures some of the quirks of these planes then while imparting some illusion of flight then I will be very happy.

And people will post chart after chart trying to support their unsupportable positions.

The lucky man is the man who leaves as little to chance as possible.