MiloMorai

No calculation. Actual U.S.A.A.F 8th and R.A.F ADGB consumption:- from documents in POWE 33/990 33/991 33/992 33/985 held at the National Archive, London.

D-9s and K-4s are absolutely out of place in Normandy.:music_whistling:

The 7,175,000 Imp gal that was consumed in 1945 in NW Europe by what?

Guy in a F-86 made it. [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2akYKhyF6X0[/ame]

Landing on a ship in calm seas but ship rolling like in a Force 8 storm. [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HjEB69-Cpk[/ame]

Coming May 9 service launched in Russia allowing internet users to trace their relatives war track during WWII, based on award documents. https://pamyat-naroda.ru/

see Table 130 for reason of aborts in the ETO and Table 131 for the MTO. If it doesn't show, it is the Army Air Force Statistical Digest. [ame]http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a542518.pdf[/ame]

Doesn't matter what the production numbers were if they aren't with the JGs. On Jan 1 1945 (Bodenplatte) the fighter force consisted of ~32% Fw190A-8s, ~3% Fw190A-9s, ~30% Bf109G-14s, ~6% Bf109G-10s, ~20% Fw190D-9s and ~11% Bf109K-4s. That 11% was 92 (55%) serviceable K-4s out of 167 on hand and that was all the Luftwaffe had. Some 212 had been written off or ~25% of 1944 production. Of the 95,488 sorties flown by fighters in the ETO in the last quarter of 1944, some 3472 had to abort due to mechanical reasons (3.6%). Spitfire production out paced K-4 production by ~50% if the Spitfire XVI numbers are included.

Even up to 75" boost but lowered to 72". http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html The Brits ran 25lb boost in their Mustangs.

Allied planes were well put together and unfortunately Axis are not modeled as they historically should be which gives them an advantage.:D

A little trivia: It was Spitfires (IXCs) of 401 Sqd RCAF that shot down the 2cd Me262 by the Allies and the 1st by RAF on Oct 5 1944. This was WNr 170093 flown by Hptm. Hans-Christoff Buttman. On Jan 1 (Bodenplatte) 401 still flying IXCs claimed 7 Lw a/c damaged or destroyed. One of those destroyed was a K-4 WNr 330119 rote 12 of 10./JG77 flown by experienced Lt Hans-Jurgen Schumacher (Stfhr). F/LT John McKay was the 401 pilot.

Ron, the end of Oct had 133 K-4s with JGs and had risen to 167 end of Dec. Some 212 had been written off (combat and non-combat). Of the serviceable fighters taking part in Bodenplatte, ~31% were A-8s, ~2.5% were A-9s, ~20% were D-9s, ~30% were G-14s, ~5.5% were G-10s and ~11% were K-4s. The ~11% K-4s were 92 serviceable out of 167 onhand. There had been 854 K-4s produced. There was no other K-4s but many A-8s, A-9s, D-9s, G-14s, G-10s in other theaters. Neubau 109 numbers can be found here, http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=2462&highlight=neubau+109&page=3 Post #28.

A Spitfire expert with 16 years of research said this: The Mk V. with C wings could indeed carry 4 Hispanos (it was rare though, IIRC there was a lack of Hispano supply), even though 2x20+4x7.7mm was more common. Indeed you are right that the Mk IX was basically a reworked Mk V structure, however you forget that the Mk IX was much heavier, and the tires/undercarriage could not support the extra weight of the Merlin 60 series AND the extra Hispanos. I have never ever seen evidence of any operational Mk IX ever carry 4 cannons. In fact it seems that the wing structure and u/c could not support that until the redesign occuring w. the Mk 2x series. If a pair of extra cannons can't be fitted then certainly no bombs or exernal fuel tanks could be carried.

It would be nice if DCS would say more about their Spitfire, and the Normandy map.

Didn't take it as you did. Yes http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-IX.html

Yes, I misunderstood what was said. It was in no way an attempt to deceive as some have said.

Source given.

Nice list rel4y. So 35 squadrons of Spitfire IXs. Following successful testing, the Spitfire IX's Merlin 66 was cleared in March 1944 to use +25 lbs, obtainable with 150 grade fuel. 36 In early May, No. 1 and No. 165 Squadrons comprising the Predannack Wing, were the first to convert their Spitfires to +25 lbs boost and employ 150 grade fuel on operations. 37 38 Air Defense Great Britain (A.D.G.B.) shared a report, dated 16th June 1944 with A.E.A.F. summarizing the RAF's experience with using 150 Grade Fuel in Merlin 66 engines. All pilots reported most favorably on the value of the high boost pressures obtainable with 150 Grade Fuel, however, Technical Staff felt that before the fuel was introduced on a large scale that the causes of backfires must be established and that at least 12 engines should complete 200 hours each. 39 By the end of July the backfires were overcome through fairly straightforward adjustments. 40 By 12 August 1944, 16 Squadrons in A.D.G.B. had been modified to to operate with 150 grade fuel. 41 http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html So approximately 1/2 of the Spitfire IX squadrons were using 150PN fuel. It would be worth reading the link to dispel the misinformation some have been posting.

Oh please Kurfurst.:music_whistling: On Jan 1 1945 there was 167 of your uber K-4s in the west of which only 92 were serviceable. Over 200 had already been lost. There primary concern was intercepting the high flying American bombers and their escort. Around 60% of the opposition for the ground attack Spitfire IXs were Bf109G-14s (~250) and Fw190A-8s (~260). Some 20% were Fw190D-9s (almost 170).

Design analysis of the P-47 http://rwebs.net/avhistory/history/p-47.htm

On Jan 1 1945, a K-4 (WNr331510) from Stab II./JG11 was probably shot down by a P-47 from the USAAF 9th AF. Also a D-9 (WNr500390) from 4./JG2 was shot down most likely by a P-47.

Some more from the 'Spitfire expert': Ok, so 7450 lbs is the MAXIMUM allowed landing weight of the spitfire IX and XVI. Adding the 2nd pair Hispanos would overload the airframe above the maximum allowed landing weight for the landings. Period, end of story. :helpsmilie:

Spitfire expert says: The Mk V. with C wings could indeed carry 4 Hispanos (it was rare though, IIRC there was a lack of Hispano supply), even though 2x20+4x7.7mm was more common. Indeed you are right that the Mk IX was basically a reworked Mk V structure, however you forget that the Mk IX was much heavier, and the tires/undercarriage could not support the extra weight of the Merlin 60 series AND the extra Hispanos. I have never ever seen evidence of any operational Mk IX ever carry 4 cannons. In fact it seems that the wing structure and u/c could not support that until the redesign occuring w. the Mk 2x series. The redesign must have occurred before the Mk2x series as 1000lb of bombs weigh substantially more than 2 extra 20mm H-S cannon and ammo. So, how expert is this Spitfire expert?

The 80 or so airfields on this map are not enough airfields? http://digitalarchive.mcmaster.ca/islandora/object/macrepo:75472 Then there are the ALGs to added to that 80. Depending on the map size, more airfields can be added, http://digitalarchive.mcmaster.ca/islandora/object/macrepo:70065 http://digitalarchive.mcmaster.ca/islandora/object/macrepo:75080 http://digitalarchive.mcmaster.ca/islandora/object/macrepo:70064 The map makers have enough to do without creating non historical options.

http://don-caldwell.we.bs/jg26/gradnetz.htm Unfortunately the west side of the map (to Bay of Biscay) is no longer there.