DD_Fenrir

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.

F4 on some aircraft gives a wing root view; you can thereafter change the external camera's FoV to hide the external model of the aircraft "out of frame" so to speak.

I hear you DB, and when it lands I'll be buying it for the same reasons - a DCS level 262 will be fascinating. However, as a proponent of an authentic and cohesive DCS WW2 environment for both single- & multi-player there are multiple aircraft that we'd be better served having ED prioritise their development efforts in. That or a Siegfried line Map.

Regular customer investment = ED financial viability = continued development/asset additions

Give us a Westwall map and yeah, 262 is valid. As it stands, it's completely irrelevant to the theatres we have. The chronological ADHD is bad enough, let's not make it any worse.

I'm using argument in it's second definition: a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory. One apparent position of the discussion is that more varied types brings greater enjoyment through variety; my point is that a don't wholly agree; an interception against medium bomber Type A versus an interception against medium bomber Type B might bring minor tactical decision changes (Type A has better defensive zones of fire here, Type B there) but ultimately in the long run will still be a medium bomber interception. In these cases the environment and mission design will play a far greater factor; if you're bored of escorting B-17s at high altitude put a bunch of A-20s to bomb from medium altitude instead, then put a cloud layer above and below and get the AI to sneak attack through the cloud so they get in close before you're aware. Set randomizers through triggers so you don't know when you'll be attacked or from what altitude or angle. Build tension. This is what makes for interesting missions. I'm not averse to the addition of ANY chronologically relevant AI aircraft (or ground) assets, and a B-26 is certainly one of them; it was the single most numerous Allied medium in the ETO in the late war and as such would be very welcome by me. Equally P-38J and Typhoon Ib are noticeably absent and important types that deserve inclusion. A Do-217 would also benefit Mosquito night intruder (codename: Flower) operations but on reflection the Ju-88 is a more than adequate stand in and at night do you really care? You'll barely see it anyway! RAF heavies would be nice but DCS WW2 is a daytime endeavour currently and incomplete even in that regard; as noted there are some important AI aircraft types that could be usefully included but furthermore there are countless ships, both Allied and Axis that are nowhere to be seen (Liberty ship anyone?) as well as an array of towed artillery types, fuel bowsers, ambulances, self propelled AAA that would be far more susceptible to player air attack than the current crop of armoured units and provide more achievable mission goals. If dev time is, as it seems, at a premium, I would argue lets get daytime DCS ETO fleshed out to a better degree then worry about elements that can be ported over to night ops.

I find this argument somewhat redundant; after all, as a WW2 fighter pilot you had a fairly limited job dob description any way: 1. Interception/Combat Air Patrol 2. Bomber/Strike Escort 3. Ground attack Ultimately the circumstances are going to be the major variables: location, numbers engaged, weather, time of day and altitude. The type engaged has some tactical bearing I grant you, but is engaging, say, a Do-217 (a medium altitude twin engine bomber) really going to feel that different to engaging a Ju-88 (a medium altitude twin engine bomber). And why have we forgotten the A-20? B-17s should be bombing from 20,000ft+, whereas the A-20s tended to bomb in the 10,000-18,000ft range. This can change the tactical environment significantly; for example the Fw 190A-8 will perform far better at typical A-20 operational altitudes than at those used for the B-17 so will be a more dangerous opponent to the escort of a medium bomber raid than it would to those protecting B-17s. Or you can get low and dirty and provide cover to some P-47s interdicting targets in France, dodging the flak with them. The imminent arrival of the Mosquito will provide further opportunities to provide low level escort missions. It boils down to this: real WW2 fighter pilot mission were repetitive; look through the Operational Record Books of any fighter squadron and you will see the same mission type again and again. For example, 132 Squadron of the RAF, equipped with Spitfire IXs, their ORBs throughout the winter of 1943 to D-Day are a veritable litany of "rendezvous with 76 x B-26 mid channel @ 12,000ft"; what changed was the time of day, the weather, and the target and also whether they even saw any enemy activity. On many of these shows not even the flak bothered, and to even see an enemy aircraft - let alone engage it - was something of a rarity.

France was liberated by the time of their introduction into service.

Not at all. I personally would like to see a 150 grade option for the Jug and Pony, if only for flexibility and options. My point has always been show those elements who demand 150 octane in face of the MW50 fighters and claim it’s unrealistic to not have it, that actually, real USAAF airmen faced this very issue and considering the de facto tactical air focus of DCS, it’s actually a better representation of history considering the available maps to not have it. Should we ever get a North Sea map with 8th Air Force bases and strategic targets for B-17s you will then find me clamouring for 150 octane options.

Ha!! Yeah, cos if you're operating on the continent and all your fuel supply has to be shipped to you via a pipeline under the English Channel, you just pick and choose the fuel grade you're supplied with. Seriously, must try harder. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html It's literally the first hit in a google search for "150 grade octane usaaf". Exhibit A: Exhibit B: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/2-supply-23nov44s.jpg So whilst 9th Air Force Units in the late winter of 1943 and spring of 1944 did indeed support 8th Air Force bomber formations, they - like 8th Fighter Command - were all still using 100 octane. By the time 150 octane is being introduced the 9th are now busy doing the job they were specifically brought to the ETO for - direct close air support of their troops or escort to mediums striking tactical targets. No P-47 or P-51 operating from the European continent in WW2 was able to benefit from 150 octane. Done.

Bapaume-Grévillers: Forgotten airfields europe

The asphalt areas are for starting your take-off run from or making your initial touchdown whilst landing. You are supposed to run on to the grass to complete your take-off roll or landing roll-out. It's not unique; Castle Bromwich Aircraft Factory used a similar feature for when they test flew production Lancasters; the concrete supports the static weight of aircraft for run-up and mag tests and the initial portion of the run, but once rolling the grass was perfectly able to support the Lanc and provided no drama.

I posted this on Discord but it bears repeating: Otherwise, Krupi is right. An extra set of eyes is never a bad thing and the Nav can help with accessing cockpit controls, particularly during emergency procedures. Regards radio, everything I have read indicates that the pilot was responsible for any external communications. The pilot also was responsible for bomb/weapon release. These apply to the FB.VI version we will be getting. In the bomber variants, the Nav would be also responsible for getting Gee fixes, bomb aiming and bomb/TTI release. In the night fighters, they were both the radar operator and (when on offensive night fighting) also supposed to be primary navigators, though in reality they often shared the navigation responsibility with the pilots particularly where ROs had been trained for defensive night fighting in 41-43 and thus hadn't been expected to navigate (beyond picking up airfield beacons to direct the pilots home).

*Sigh* You have no idea what you’re talking about. If you did you’d realise that your argument holds absolutely no water. The primary source evidence is out there on the internet. I strongly suggest you go educate yourself. Come back and make informed opinions and then maybe you’ll be worth having a discussion with.

It ain't that simple. The 9th Tactical Air Force of the US Army Air Force, that providing direct support to the ground forces never operated with 150 octane. Ever. Period. However, the 8th Air Force, running the Strategic Bomber Campaign into the heart of the Reich, did. Whilst the 8th Air Force Fighter Command were sequestered to help on the tactical battle field for about 2 weeks over Normandy commencing with D-Day, thereafter they went back to escorting the bombers hitting primarily fuel targets across Germany. There were also some brief interludes around the Battle of the Bulge in December. So if you were a Reichsverteidigung Jagdflieger you'd have been far more likely to bump into Mustangs pulling 72", and P-47s pulling 67". If you were a front pilot the Mustangs you met would have been 67" and the T-bolts 57". Given the restricted map sizes available in DCS this automatically tends to focus the operations to those of a Tactical nature, ergo 100 octane variants would be most appropriate.

That's all well and good but, in reality the performance benefits between these later variants and their earlier iterations of them are negligible. The difference between a K-4 and a G-6 is a bit more than negligible. The point has been made time and time and time again, and yes a Westwall map would have made far more sense but RRG went for Normandy for the $$$. The only aircraft that currently 100% fit the Normandy map timeframe are the Spit and the Anton. However, the P-51 and P-47 perform as near as identically to the marks in use at that time to make no difference, so we are obliged to overlook the inconsistencies. We are stuck with it. Do I like it? No. I'd rather have P-51B/Cs, Razorback P-47s, a 109G-6/14 for Normandy and a Winter West Front Map for 1944/1945 to use the K-4 and Dora on. But we will wait a long time for that. Many 109 pilots have proved online that whilst the K-4 w/o MW50 has some disadvantages against it's opponents it also has some excellent strengths and is still very competitive if flown intelligently. This brings it inline with all the other types, which all have strengths and weaknesses which need to be harnessed (or exploited).

As for point 2... 1. The closer you can get the less lead you need. Easier said than done, as we are already discussing, 2. If the target seems to be pulling a constant turn rate try pulling your gunsight steadily through him in a good coordinated tracking solution and fire a short (0.5 second) burst as he disappears under the nose; relax back pressure as soon as you release the trigger to pull him back into the gunsight and make a damage assessment. Also, the AI tend to react to taking hits and may break out of the turn when taking fire, so the latter is important to keep your erstwhile target in sight. 3. Your lag pursuit into a lower lead solution is a perfectly valid but has, as you identify, the issue of taking time and reliance of a stupid move by the opponent. That said, it's one I have been obliged to use on more than one occasion. 4. The last option is to lead him so aggressively on the closing stage that you end up performing a move akin to when you overshoot a formation rejoin; you cross behind his tail too fast and too close for a reliable snapshot but use the Spits excellent pitch authority to pull back in for a low 6 attack.

Even according to the DCS Spitfire Manual, there should be a bypass system in the radiator circuit such that should the coolant temperature drop <80 the coolant is switched to NOT route through the radiators... Must be unserviceable at the mo...

Which is why a Bf 109G-6/G-14 would be a wise and very welcome addition to DCS. That or a Westwall map....

I find when watching others dogfight videos that when they are trying to close on a turning target they are habitually not allowing enough lead. If you're 500-1000 yards behind just putting the gunsight a ring or two in front is simply not sufficient. Your erstwhile target has to be in your quarter windows if you are to gain angles and range promptly, akin to a bearing line rejoin for getting reformed on a leader.

Night fighter variants are kind of irrelevant to DCS WW2 currently - a C-6 Ju-88 kind of makes sense.

I hope they NEVER change it just to provide you with ongoing source of torment to the end of your days because you richly deserve it.