- Early Airco D.H.2's flexible machinegun
I'm with Baldrick on this one; every mention I've read says it was unworkable, and pilots quickly fixed it in the field.
- Airco/De Havilland D.H.4's fuel tank exposure
Again, more of a psychological issue. The communications problem was noted, and fixed post-war in the US.
I'm not sure any plane was particularly vulnerable to fuel tank fires (that is, they
ALL were).
- Dec. '17/Jun '18 Aviatik D.I's unreachable machineguns
As John notes, a number of planes have this problem, though the A-H ones lasted much longer than those on the western front.
This should be a rule for die-hard purists, as an unfixable jam is a mission kill, and not for fun play.
- Fokker E.IV triple machinegun prone to jamming
My bigger problem was is degraded performance, which is not reflected in the Immellmann Booster card.
- Siemens-Schuckert D.IV's exceptional climb rate
Definitely worth doing.
- twin machineguns Sopwith Triplane's additional weight (the 2nd mg seemed not to give relevant penalties to other planes as the HD.1)
IIRC, this was recently discussed and the performance degradation seemed to be in climb rate and ceiling.
Also, (again IIRC) Collishaw's tripe had a better engine. But with the camel coming out, it wasn't worth pursuing this development.
- wing failures on Nieuport 11, Albatros D.III/V/Va, early Fokker Dr.I up to nov 1916
And Fokker D.VII, E.V, Nieuport 28.
- different climb rates and top altitudes for different engines of a few planes
I'm not sure this is worth pursuing; it would add too much bookkeeping to be worth it.
Any more suggestions for any WoW/WGF plane?
I'll think on this
Karl
Bookmarks