DD_Fenrir

There is no DCS: WW2 Night Fighting environment. Ergo the P-61, among many others would be a white elephant. At a minimum you'd need: ETO: 1x RAF Heavy 1x Luftwaffe night fighter (Ju 88C/G/Bf 110G/He 219) 1x late war Luftwaffe bomber (Ju 188/Do 217) Red GCI Blue GCI Historical Nav-aids Relevant Map(s) PTO Pacific WW2 Assets Relevant Map(s) I've said it one, I will say it again: as much as I'd love to see it (and I really do, I'd love to try night interceptions or bomber support in a Mosquito NF.XII/XIII) there is just not the community interest to make this hugely demanding form of WW2 aerial combat viable. I'd love to be proved wrong, but I just don't see it happening.

If it didn't seem like you'd swallowed the Grumman PR campaign for the F-14 hook line and sinker you're point would be valid. You're so in love with the F-14 (and I get it, I really do) that you point to the flimsiest sources or out of context data to validate your affection. This is why you fail to recognise that your "Mach 2.5" source is the absolute dictionary definition of anecdotal; there is no accompanying data to corroborate, no defining parameters as to how, where and why the aircraft was able to reach these speed. What if the TF-30s were being one-off tested to a limited high power setting to see what stresses they could endure? What if the aircraft was stripped of pylons and some other drag inducing elements? What fuel weight was the aircraft at? What about the rest of the airframe? Was a gun fitted, was there even a RIO in the aircraft, or Radar? What altitude/air pressure/air density was this achieved? What if all the elements combined to give this? Even then, even if it could make 2.5 under some special circumstance, perhaps there are structural reasons the aircraft shouldn't.

The appeal would last as long as it takes to joy-ride around in it - and I get it, I really do, would be fun to bash around in a DCS: Lancaster. But to use it in a realistic operational context? Where's the map? Where's the night fighters? Where's the Gee or H2S?

In relation to what parameters? Peacetime training? Actual all out war? What radar system are you trying to avoid? What terrain around the system and your aircraft? All of these can define how low you can or have to fly to avoid radar detection.

Errr... Not Amiens Prison. But thanks for linking the latest Mossie vid!

The .303 loadout. APIT = Armour Piercing rounds + De Wilde Incendiary + Tracer BalT = Ball (solid metal slug) rounds + De Wilde Incendiary + Tracer The API and Bal are the same as above with the tracer omitted. The 20mm only have HEI/SAPI round options with no tracer, as per authentic WW2 loadout.

The attack profile: At a point ten miles from target the 2nd section of each wave separated from their lead section, breaking off to the north to await the bomb detonations from the 1st Section before making their own attack runs. Aircraft attacking the walls were to release their bombs from 10-20 ft altitude(!). Aircraft attacking what were (wrongly) assumed to be the guardhouses to release their bombs from 20-30 ft altitude. During briefing there were concerns that the bomb casings could break up on impact and it was decided that, to try and prevent this, all attack runs would have to be made at under 240mph IAS. As it was, the sturdiness of the wall construction had been overestimated and in reality a number of bombs punched holes straight through the walls, accounting for some of the damage to the main prison building. Furthermore, with the ground frozen hard a number of the bombs skipped wildly, careening long past the target, one demolishing a civilian home some 220m beyond the prison and another demolishing the wing of a Luftwaffe hospital nearly 900m distant. Contrary to popular belief, there is evidence to suggest that the 3rd wave (21 Sqn) was not to flatten the prison in the event of the failure of the first two waves to breach the prison walls or the presumed guardhouses, but rather endeavour a second time to make the breaches necessary to aid the inmates escape.

Here's how I reconcile the decision of the DoD; 1. Radar based stealth has been a requirement of 5th Gen and future designs 2. IRST technology is rapidly being developed as a viable counter to radar Stealth 3. of the US fighters of the 90's/2000's the F-14D is the only one equipped with an integrated IRST (and a reportedly pretty good one - was able to track F-22 at useful range in testing) 4. IRST capabilities now becomes something of a sensitive subject based on US reliance on radar stealth force multiplier strategy 5. F-14D IRST maybe 30 years old but if it works why give your opponents any clues what it is A. capable of (even 30 years ago), or B. potentially capable of given 30 years more development? It's a good a reason as any to explain the clamp down, and as Tharos points out, their bloody right to. Amazing how some here measure their computer game desires as more valuable than the security of those who might be called on to give their lives for our freedoms....

Whilst I agree it would be a nice modification to have as a great number of the 2nd TAF Spitfires had the MkII Gyro Gunsight fitted prior to D-Day, only one of the Wings (135) was equipped with the E-wing armament, with 125 Wing of 83 Group (those wings first to France) being converted in mid June and much of 84 Group (those wings still based in the UK until late July/August) gradually having their Spits brought up to 'E' armament through June and July. 83 Group would have to wait till December 1944/January 1945 to see .50 armed Spitfire IXs and XVIs across it's entire OOB, though it would be good to have a variant as you describe to better represent the version of the Spitfire IX/XVI that face Bf 109K-4s and Fw 190D-9s... and a Westwall map to place them in...

@Basco1 @xvii-Dietrich Gents, given the historical relevance of the airfield to the apparent chronology of the DCS: Channel Map perhaps you would add your approval to my post requesting its addition:

Note to all. In light of fresh information I have amended the first two posts. I will continue to update should further clarifying detail come to light.

Not far from reality by a lot of accounts.

Having watched the video - set-up your K14 so it's a help not a hindrance! Put the range to 1000ft (the optimum harmonisation setting). Adjust the wingspan to 35ft (a good balance between the 109 and 190) and fire when the targets wingspan is touching the inner edges of the graticule. Keep the fixed centre dot so you have an aiming reference when the graticule is catching up with the aircraft movement. Your issue is you are spattering the target, not getting a decisive concentrated cluster of hits in essential area.

Ammo belting plays a part here; Nineline is currently working on getting more authentic belting options implemented in game, which in it's 1944 pattern should be more effective. Don't forget that a single .50 cal bullet, unless it's through the pilot's noggin, is going to have to be very well placed to bring a plane down, and even 41 of them could be ineffective if they're not in the right place. There's a lot of empty space in an aeroplane. The key is to concentrate your burst by getting a good tracking solution and - even more - crucially trying to use your convergence patterns to your advantage. This is the wonder of the new damage model. I too have peppered an e/a with many small hits and not seen much happen; conversely at other times I've lit up his fuel tank with my first half-second burst. Also what damage you do can cause issues for the enemy but not bring down the plane; he might be leaking smoke and/or fluid, but if he's got control and the motors still running, then he'll be on limited time but could still present a threat. Until he's on fire, missing major sub-assemblies or hit the silk, keep at him.

I was there 8 years ago bashing about in the P-51D with no cogent era appropriate targets or air opponents. I was there when the F-86 and MiG-15 came and then... nothing, no '50s era ground assets, no map no B-29 to escort or intercept. Without these the sandbox is a pretty place and superficially absorbing but as soon as the "ooh shiny!! effect is gone and your skills in the aircraft are procedurally adept, one is left hankering for a deeper experience. I find that in trying to replicate the historical combat experiences of the brave men & women who were obliged to fly and fight in these aircraft, to gain a tiny fraction of understanding of what they went through. DCS is a combat simulator. To simulate one has to have a model, a real world example, for which to strive for your simulation to emulate. If you produce historical units for that simulation surely you should strive to emulate the circumstances in which those units were employed? If DCS WW2 wasn't a thing yet and the Me 262 had been released into the DCS modern era environment alone, facing off against F-86s, MiG-15s at best and at worst late Cold War MiGs and teen series fighters, I bet my mortgage the vast majority of you erstwhile 262 jocks would be screaming for WW2 era opposition within days if not weeks. That's bloody arrogant. Who the hell are you to dictate to me where and how to find my enjoyment? Last time I checked I pay the same as you and I have every right as a current and future customer to voice my opinion on what I'd like to see for the future. If anything, your argument makes more sense if it's turned back on you; if you want to fly an Me 262 so bad and you don't care about a cohesive combat environment why don't you go get X-plane/MSFS/Prepar3d and fly it there.

Er... No. I want chronologically relevant and historically authentic opponents and maps for my DCS experience thanks.

The roadmap when the new cloud tech landed was the static templates for now, with dynamic and wind affected clouds further down the development timeline. It’s an iterative process. No timeline has been given as to when these improvements will be available.

Weather: Details now added to first post.

Whoops! Been a long week... thanks Bart, correcting...

Hi all! Please note that I have updated the first post to read as I had originally intended! More to follow.

The aircraft involved: ALLIES: ATTACK AIRCRAFT Bomb load for all the Mosquitos was two 500 lb (230 kg) Semi-armour piercing (SAP) bombs and two 500 lb (230 kg) Medium Capacity (MC), all fuzed for 11 seconds' delay. It is unclear which stations held what. 1st Wave 487 Sqn RNZAF – Callsign: DYPEG; Aircraft: Mosquito FB.VI RAF Hunsdon Red Section (attack prison Eastern wall) Red 1 EG-R (LR333) W/C I. S. Smith, DFC F/Lt P. E. Barns, DFC Red 2 EG-T (HX982) P/O Maxwell Sparks P/O A. C. Dunlop Red 3 EG-H (HX856) F/Sgt S. Jennings W/O J. M. Nichols Yellow Section (attack prison Northern wall) Yellow 1 EG-C (HX909) P/O M. L. S. Darrell P/O F. S. Stevenson Yellow 2 EG-J (HX974) P/O D. R. Fowler W/O F. A. Wilkins Yellow 3 EG-Q (HX855) F/Lt B. D. Hanafin P/O C. F. Redgrave 2nd Wave 464 Sqn RAAF – Callsign: CANON; Aircraft: Mosquito FB.VI RAF Hunsdon Red Section (attack prison guard quarters Eastern end) Red 1 SB-F (LR334) W/Cdr Robert Iredale F/Lt J. L. McCaul Red 2 SB-A (MM402) S/Ldr W. R. C. Sugden F/O A. N. Bridges Red 3 SB-U (MM410) F/O K. L. Monaghan F/O A. W. Dean Yellow Section (attack prison guard quarters Western end) Yellow 1 SB-T (MM404) S/Ldr A. I. McRitchie F/Lt R. Sampson Yellow 2 SB-V (MM403) F/Lt T. McPhee F/Lt G. W. Atkins Yellow 3 EG-F (HX922) G/Capt Percy Pickard F/Lt John Broadley Film Production Unit (FPU); Aircraft: Mosquito B.IV RAF Hunsdon O-Orange (DZ414) F/Lt A. Wickam P/O L. Howard 3rd Wave 21 Sqn RAF – Callsign: BUCKSHOT; Aircraft: Mosquito FB.VI RAF Hunsdon Red Section (attack prison) Red 1 YH-U (LR403) W/C I. G. Dale F/O E. Gabites Red 2 YH-J (MM398) F/Lt M. J. Benn F/O N. A. Roe Red 3 YH-O (HX930) F/Lt A. E. C. Wheeler F/O N. M. Redington Yellow Section (attack prison) Yellow 1 YH-D (LR385) F/Lt D. A. Taylor S/Ldr P. Livry Yellow 2 YH-P (LR348) F/Lt E. E. Hogan F/Sgt D. A. S. Crowfoot Yellow 3 YH-F (LR388) F/Sgt A. Steadman P/O E. J. Reynolds ESCORT AIRCRAFT 1st Wave 198 Sqn RAF – Callsign: GARLIC; Aircraft: Typhoon 1b RAF Manston TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt R. Dall TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt R. Roper TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt R. Lallement TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt J. Scambler TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt R. Armstrong TP-? (serial u/k) F/Lt R. Niblett 2nd Wave 174 Sqn RAF – Callsign: CAJOLE; Aircraft: Typhoon 1b RAF Westhampnett XP-? (JR133) F/O J. E. Reynaud XP-? (JP793) F/Sgt H. S. Brown XP-? (JR310) F/Lt F. A. Grantham XP-? (JP541) F/Sgt F. E. Wheeler XP-? (JP671) F/Lt G. I. Mallett XP-? (JP308) F/O W. C. Vatcher XP-? (JR303) P/O W. D. Burton XP-A (JP535) F/O H. V. Markby 3rd Wave 245 Sqn RAF – Callsign: DUNLOP; Aircraft: Typhoon 1b RAF Westhampnett MR-? (serial u/k) S/Ldr J. R. Collins MR-? (serial u/k) F/Sgt D. J. Lush MR-? (serial u/k) P/O K. J. Dickie MR-? (serial u/k) F/O A. E. Miron MR-? (serial u/k) P/O L. Jeffreys MR-? (serial u/k) F/O R. G. F. Lee MR-? (serial u/k) F/Sgt D. C. Nott MR-? (serial u/k) F/Sgt E. E. G. Noakes Target Cover 3 Sqn RAF – Callsign: ???; Aircraft: Typhoon 1b RAF Manston None of this squadrons aircraft took off as the required drop tanks could not be fitted in time. AXIS: TBC

Hey all, With the imminent release of the Mosquito FB.VI, and with interest rising in some of it's precision raid exploits, I hope you will allow me to furnish you with some resources for recreating one of the most fascinating raids, the attack on Amiens Prison. Widely but inaccurately christened "Operation Jericho", it's true name was Ramrod 564. No codename was actually given to the operation; the Jericho appellation was acquired due to PR spin purposes well after the raid. Whilst the DCS Channel map will be a natural host for the mission, it is a little truncated to do so to 100% accuracy. 140 Wing, the wing assigned to accomplish Ramrod 564 was based at RAF Hunsdon, a concrete runway airfield some 22 miles North-northeast of London and therefore unavailable in the DCS Channel Map. However, with some artistic liberties the raid could still be reasonably well recreated in DCS. Route Map: The original Field Order remarks that the first steer point after base should be Littlehampton on the South coast West of Worthing, however that would have entailed a transit across central London and it's balloon barrage, plus a significant period of flight across a very built up area in aircraft carrying bombs and subject to the vagaries of wartime maintenance; an emergency situation whilst over the city could have dire consequences for those below, so an intermediate steerpoint at Henley to the West of London was added. Thereafter all steerpoints were as per the field order and include: LITTLEHAMPTON (RV with Typhoon escorts) TOCQUEVILLE SENARPONT BOURDON One mile south DOULLENS BOUZINCOURT (2 miles Northwest of Albert) TARGET ST SAVIEUR SENARPONT TOCQUEVILLE HASTINGS Here's a detail of the French steer-points: Let's have a look at the threats faced by 140 Wing. Firstly the Jagdwaffe. Whilst some may note the relative proximity of Abbeville and it's infamous Abbeville-Drucat airfield, in actuality by the date of this raid no operational units were based at the airfield; some 6 months previously the Jadgwaffe had pulled all operational units back from coastal airfields, for various reasons, probably partially to reduce the attrition of units from sudden fighter-bomber attack and also to give the fighters extra space and time to get to altitude before engaging Allied bomber raids. The closest field that apparently was occupied by the Jagdwaffe was Bapaume-Grévillers. Sources indicate 7th Staffel of JG26 equipped with Fw 190A (probably -6 or -7 subvariants) were based here. It would be this very Staffel that emerged from cloud just as the 2nd Wave (464 Sqn and the unfortunate Grp Cpt Pickard) were orbiting to avoid the detonations of the 1st Wave's (487 Sqn) bombs. Whilst Amiens-Glissy field was the closest to the route, it like Abbeville had not seen an operational unit for about 6 months. There was however a Flak unit stationed still at the airfield, which was very much operational, despite a bombing raid a few days prior by some 70-odd B-26s of the 9th Air Force... Which segues nicely onto the next threat - flak. Below are two maps outlining the reported instances of where 140 Wing came under fire from ground units during the operation. Note that the majority occur on the outbound legs, indicating a measure of surprise had been achieved. First note; some of these are slightly speculative. Often we get a rough location of where AA fire is encountered (e.g. "NW edge of large woods near Senarpont") but rarely specifics as to the direction of the fire. Also we are relying on aircrew actually seeing the fire directed at them (not always a given) and the sources I have read actually recording all reported engagements by ground units. That said, the first recorded encounter is quite specific... It would appear that the 1st Wave (487 Sqn) managed to get all the way to Albert before getting fired upon; they over-ran their Bouzincourt steer-point slightly which took them closer to Albert than planned, and also within range of the 20 and 30mm flak guns protecting a BMW Factory and other industries on the Western fringes of the town. However, all Mossies managed to escape the barrage unscathed. The second noted example is the Flak unit at Amiens-Glisy airfield; as previously mentioned as 2nd Wave (464 Sqn) approached the prison it had caught up to 1st Wave (487 Sqn) and in order to avoid getting caught in the blast of their 11 second delayed action bombs, Wng Cdr Bob Iredale led his squadron in a 360 orbit to port... right into range of the guns at Amiens-Glisy. However, again 140 Wing were lucky and manged to avoid getting hit. The next encounter was actually made by Flt Lt ‘Titch’ Hanafin, who'd been obliged to abort with engine failure near Doullen. As he passed wooded areas near Allery he came under MG and 20mm fire, his aircraft took hits and Hanafin was wounded. Despite being paralysed down one-side he managed to keep control and put down at RAF Ford, the divert field for the mission. The next encounter is somewhat ambiguous, hence the question mark linking two separate sites. Both are referenced as the locations where the unfortunate Sqn Ldr Ian Ritchie and his navigator Flt Lt Sampson came under fire, their Mosquito being severely damaged and Sampson killed when a flak round detonated in the cockpit. One source indicates they were engaged by the guns protecting a V-1 site under construction near Fresneville; the other that they were near Villeroy when they came under fire. I include them both for options sake. The site east of the Senarpont turnpoint was a likely location for where Smith Sparks and Jennings of the 1st Wave (487 Sqn) reported there were many small sandy hills and slopes from where numerous German soldiers opened fire at them with rifles. Finally, as the 1st Wave approached the coast they noticed a green painted pill box on an escarpment and saw the tell-tale flickering of guns firing from the slot; Sparks aircraft was hit and took significant damage but was able to maintain control and make RAF Ford to land. It would be pertinent to note that there would have been significant flak defences at other V-1 construction sites in the vicinity (I am still attempting to localise these) but particularly at the ports and harbours; Le Treport and Dieppe either side of the ingress/egress flight route would have been significantly well defended. For now we'll end on a couple of other notable occurrences/features. Firstly, just after the 1st wave (487 Sqn) passed Bourdon they spotted a large German convoy of military vehicles, heavy artillery and tanks on the main road between Flixecourt and Belloy-sur-Somme, heading towards Amiens. Whilst the majority of the 140 Wing aircraft ignored it and stayed on mission, the temptation proved too great for P O Fowler. Flying ‘J-Johnny’ in sixth position, he attacked and set alight a truck before re-joining formation. Secondly a notable landmark was the tall aerial mast SW of Doullen. Weather: At RAF Hunsdon (met. station North Weald [7 miles distant]) : Winds: Force 3 -4 (8-18mph/7-16 Knots) from North-Northeast Cloud: Overcast, cloud base 800-1200 ft AMSL (airfield elevation 262ft AMSL) (Sparks reports entering cloud after take-off at 100ft altitude!) Precipitation: Snow At Littlehampton (met. station Thorney Island [17 miles distant]) : Winds: Force 3 -4 (8-18mph/7-16 Knots) from North east to North Cloud: Overcast, cloud base 1500 ft AMSL (town elevation ?ft AMSL) Precipitation: Snow At Troqueville : Winds: Force unknown (?mph/?Knots) from North Cloud: Clear, cloud base ? ft AMSL (town elevation ?ft AMSL) Precipitation: None At Amiens : Winds: Force unknown (?mph/?Knots) from North Cloud: 9-10ths, cloud base 1,500 - 2,000 ft AMSL (town elevation ?ft AMSL) Precipitation: None It is known that after taking off in almost blizzard conditions, and being obliged to fly the majority of the overland UK part of the route in IMC the overcast lifted slightly not long after beginning the crossing of the channel and the snow ceased. At times it is reported that the cloud cleared enough even to allow some pale sunlight to break through and as they crossed the French coast there were blue skies. However, the photographs from Sparks aircraft and the FPU Mosquito show zero evidence of shadows, indicating that by the time the raid hit Amiens, there was an overcast once again.

Well then, challenge upheld and I stand corrected, I had no idea there were any outside of Germany in the late summer of 1944. Thanks Dietrich.

Can that KG51 source be verified? As far as I was aware Ekdo 262 were the first operators and there seem to be zero combat reports of encounters which seems odd considering USAAF aircraft were visiting and attacking known Luftwaffe bases well beyond the immediate battlefront in attempts to suppress their activities.