Aircraft of New Switzerland as of 1918

[Sachmle]

Well, and M1919/M1917 weighed 31lbs (14kg) and a M2 weighs 83.78lbs (38kg) and a Vicker's .303 weighed 33.07lbs (15kg) so if RRC is using the 50cal (0.5") MG then I'd say ~100-110lbs for gun, ammo, and mounting (probably wood).

[Logi]

I'm using a 10mm, even smaller. And its a 50 cal.

[Sachmle]

I'm using a 10mm, even smaller. And its a 50 cal.

50cal is 0.5"/12.7mm so if you're using a 10mm you're using a 0.3937008 cal (39 cal Basically)

[Logi]

Oh sorry, I meant caliber as in barrel length. I forgot its not used to refer to small arms.

[Walter]

Should be .50 caliber and not 50 caliber. In my eyes, those two designations are two different things. :)

The Silorsky V was built in 1915, so no, it isn't a 1914 plane.

Actually, the Ilya Muromets itself is a 1913 plane so it would fall into the 1910/1914 category even if the S-23V is (according to wiki) from 1914 (though that would also mean it uses the 1910/1914 tech). :)

I don't see how you downgraded the specs, your plane has a higher ceiling than 2 others, a higher max speed that 2 others, carries more bombs than 2 others, and has a much longer range than 3 others. Yeah it only has 1 MG but that's about all the downgrading you've done. In the critical range vs payload capabilities, your plane is considerably better than 3 and matches 1.

I agree with DF.
Also, you can't be certain that if you take the various stats of numerous planes and then mix it into one plane, that one plane will acually have those stats if it was built in the real world, even if you were to downgrade the combined stats.
... and that is why you should just stick to 1 plane to base you plane on instead of trying to mix the stats of numerous different planes. :)
One question. With quite a few planes around in this era, why is it necessary to take the aspects of numerous planes (which you can't build with your tech anyway) and mix it into 1 plane and downgrade the stats somewhat when it is a lot easier to stick to the stats of a single plane (and one that you can build with your tech)?

[Logi]

Because I have access to more powerful engines and I have certain design requirements that the OTL ones don't meet.

[ctwaterman]

*sighs*

The More Powerful Engines used to be a seperate tech and it then became the MAS/MTB Boat Technology.  Even then the RRC was lagging behind the curve of Engine Techs.

Now a 1916 aircraft is a 1916 aircraft pick one who's Picture you like and quote its stats in your site.

As a note the top speeds of many of these aircraft are not sustainable for any lenght of time.  Range is a factor determined by cruising speed at a given altitude and usually to get maximum range you give up significant amounts of payload.

As an example a B-17 can carry 4000 lbs of bombs to Berlin and return home but if its attacking say the sub pens at Lorient it can carry 8000 lbs of bomb.  Ranges quoted in these web sites are typically Max Range or Ferry Ranges as they are called where the plane is carry crew and fuel and nothing else.

As an example the British used Float planes with 16" Torpedoes with some limited success in 1916.   I think atleast 3 nations including myself are using that version of the 1916 aircraft for our Maritime Patrol Bomber.  But what the limited success doesnt tell you is these aircraft were operating at the extremes of their capabilities.  One had engine trouble landed on the water and attacked and sank an Ottoman frieghter with its torpedo while still taxi'ing on the water.   All were operating at extremely short range from their sea plane base as well usually 75 to 100 Miles or less.

Anyway have fun but Im pretty sure the stats of the planes really arent going to mean much in the event of a war.  So pick the pretty one..... so your pilots can at least look good as they fall burning out of the sky.   

"And when I asked my flight instructor what the revolver was for he said when your plane catches on fire and your a mile up in the sky you dont have to burn to death on the way down.  It either the pistol or jump."

[Logi]

Actually no... CT, I was behind one year in Engine Tech from you (as in research time, not the actual tech themselves) so I find it your claim that I was lagging behind the curve preposterous.

I can flesh out my aircrafts if I want, I DON'T have to just call it a 1916 aircraft.

I never mentioned that the plane would operate at full speed all the time, that's just foolish. Neither did I mention they will operate at maximum range at all times, which is also foolish.

In the event of a war, the aircraft stats may not mean much, but I'll fill them in if I want to. Furthermore, I can assign them roles in a war rather than giving it the generic and somewhat lazy response of 1916 aircrafts.

[Desertfox]

Because I have access to more powerful engines and I have certain design requirements that the OTL ones don't meet.

Bigger engines do not equal better planes. Case in point...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caproni_Ca.60

I have a requirement for a plane capable of dropping nuclear bombs on China (both) from NS. But it ain't going to happen. Draft the requirements, see whats available and go with that. Yeah you wont get what you want, but that is life.

In the event of a war, the aircraft stats may not mean much, but I'll fill them in if I want to. Furthermore, I can assign them roles in a war rather than giving it the generic and somewhat lazy response of 1916 aircrafts.

Most stats won't mean anything during war, but certain ones will. Specificlly such stuff as range and payload (for bombers), exaclly the stats were you are ahead of the times.

[Logi]

As CT said, if I unload the payload of 2000lb and fill it up with fuel I *think* I should manage atleast 700mi....

Besides: The stats have been adjusted.