Talisman_VR

Great stuff :thumbup: Some of my squad mates are potential customers now the Spitfire is released. Happy landings, Talisman

Can't believe you have asked this, loads of posts on a thread months back showing not just a trial (mission reports and other stuff). No time to find them at the moment, but will look later perhaps. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

The in-game gunnery tutorial says set range for 150 yards, so I had presumed that the convergence was set to 150 yards; if not, then perhaps the gunnery tutorial should be changed to reflect a range of 300 yards, not 150 yards (big difference, LOL). It would be good if you could confirm gun single point convergence range for certain Yo-Yo. It is very important, crucial in fact, if we are to use the gun sight to best effect. Thank you in anticipation. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Hi Andre, Do you have any news as to when you will be able to include the Spitfire Mk IX as an update? Happy landings, Talisman

I thought that ball rounds and observer rounds .303 were no longer used by RAF fighters after early war and that incendiary and AP (50/50%) was the standard loadout once armour protection was used more on aircraft of both sides. I don't think it would be historically correct to see .303 ball and observer rounds in use by RAF Spitfires Mk IX over France. Any experts out there to confirm this? No point in observer rounds as they do no damage and strikes can be observed by incendiary rounds, so observer rounds were not needed. Please don't tell me DCS are going to give us useless observer rounds and ball rounds in the Mk IX Spitfire over France! Sorry if I have got the wrong end of the stick about this (this ammunition stuff is a bit confusing, LOL), but hope someone with some proper knowledge could put me at ease. Thanks in anticipation. Happy landings, Talisman

The irony is that the XIV was held up in the UK to fend off the flying bombs until late 1944 and by the time the K4 came to the front line in numbers the lack of fuel and air supremacy mitigated any kind of gains in performance. Not all XIV, but some used on anti 'diver' (V1 flying bomb) duties (including Mk IX Spit) and even then not exclusively. For example, the RAF used its aircraft very flexibly and in the same day multiple sorties could include both anti 'diver' missions and other types of operations across the English channel. Also, the anti 'diver' missions were rotated and shared amongst other aircraft types including the 25lbs Spitfire Mk IX, Mustang, Mosquito and Tempest; there were plenty of aircraft types to share the task. V1 attacks peaked for a limited period of about 2 months before tailing off. Very much looking forward to the Mk IX Spitfire :thumbup: Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Rare is a relative term perhaps in this instance. Personally, I would not use the term 'rare' for any aircraft that was produced in the many hundreds. Also, as Jeffrey Quill indicated, they were delivered in the numbers required at the time when they were need. If more had been needed then more would have been produced, particularly the Mk XIV, but with Allied air superiority and the LW very much on the back foot later in the war, then not so many thousands of air superiority fighters were needed. I think it is worth suggesting that it was the Axis that needed many thousands of the latest air superiority fighters (and super weapons) but could not produce enough. Both the Mk IX and Mk XIV historically flew together and were in combat in the sky with the current DCS Axis opposition aircraft. The difference is that the Mk IX is in a league below the Mk XIV and the current DCS Axis opposition aircraft in terms of the technological time line. So, historically the Mk IX is a good fit for us, but when, without exception, all opposition for it on a MP combat competitive server is from the higher league in terms of the technological time line, then the combat competition element for PC pilots is somewhat skewed and skewed in favour of the Axis aircraft at the moment. Of course, not all Digital Combat Simulation customers want to engage in competitive digital combat, human vs human on MP servers, but it is something that attracts many DCS customers. Happy landings, Talisman

Ok, thought I read that they were issued during the period of the Normandy invasion. Happy landings, Talisman

Jeffrey Quill, the famous Supermarine test pilot (also flew Spitfires in action during the Battle of Britain), said that the Mk IX and Mk XIV were the 2 outstanding examples in terms of taking opportunistic advantage of engine engineering developments to meet urgent operational demands. He also said that, in fact, in his opinion, the Mk XIV turned out to be the best of all the fighter variants of the Spitfire. He also goes on to say that, "furthermore, both marks became available in quantity precisely when they were most needed". So we should be getting 2 great Spitfire models :thumbup: Ref: Book Spitfire by Jeffrey Quill, IBSN 0-09-937020-4, chapter 20, page 221. I think the most iconic version is the Mk 1a from the Battle of Britain period, but that does not match the current plane set and Normandy map as things stand at the moment. Happy landings, Talisman

Many thanks for the vid Wags. Happy landings, Talisman

Looking at the start up clip from Wags, I notice that it appears we might not be getting the gyro gun sight. Given WIP, does anyone know whether the type of gun sight has been confirmed as gyro or not yet? Happy landings, Talisman

From the air, looking in the direction that the sun is shining from, the ground, horizon and objects appear clearer to me than when I look at the ground and objects with the sun behind me. Surely this should be the other way around. I would expect visibility to be more difficult when looking in the direction of the sun, not when looking with the sun behind me. It is puzzling to me that I climb and position myself with the sun behind me, thinking I can spot targets better, as in real life, but in fact visibility is worse (more haze) with the sun behind me! It is not something to do with the cockpit canopy because I get the same effect when looking with the canopy open and not looking through the Perspex. Any one else noticed this? It is kind of like the effect of the sun light is back-to-front (better visibility (less haze) looking towards the sun and worse visibility (more haze) when the sun is behind me. Can anyone explain this? Happy landings, Talisman

I hope a stage to properly include the South coast of England will eventually be reached with DCS. Happy landings, Talisman

Many thanks for the update. Gosh, we are so close to almost seeing the South coast of England. So close that it hurts to see it is not quite there. Good luck with the project. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Apparently, according to my internet research: The horns on the tips of the elevators are aerodynamic balances. Designed to provide aerodynamic leverage forward of the hinge and thereby ease control pressures in flight. Also: elevator horns also allowed for a wider span of CG travel. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman P.S. Just had a thought in my feeble old brain that this could be considered as a sort of power assistance mechanism.

The web page says this: "Elevators All except the initial production Mk. IXs had elevators with extended mass balance horns. Whereas the early Spitfires had a 45-degree break in the hinge line, this new pattern had an additional 45-degree break, resulting in the tip of the elevator pointing straight forward. As a rule of thumb the early pattern is seen on Mk. IXs converted from Mk. Vs, and early original Mk. IXs. I’ve seen both patterns on aircraft in the MA serial range (Castle Bromwich – mid-1943 vintage)." So I presume our DCS model is either a converted Mk V or one of the early original initial production batch Mk IX mid 1943 vintage. Correct? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick? Happy landings, Talisman

I don't think it will. We will have to wait for the Mk XIV for that. In the combat flight sim world most hard core simmers are wised up about their aircraft due to a passionate interest and have hundreds, even thousands, of hours of stick time. It is impossible to simulate a near real life (weather and physical, etc,) and wartime situation, even though we try our best. In real life much more was going on rather than just the set up air-to-air duels that we take part in again and again on MP at the moment (hope that will change eventually). The Mk IX is from a league below the Dora and 109K in terms of the technological development time line. I think it will be like racing with the previous seasons car in F1; you might put on a respectable performance now and then if luck goes your way (and get some PR for your sponsors), but don't expect to win the championship. Might be fun though. Happy landings, Talisman

I don't want a walking simulator. Don't walk, fly! Happy landings, Talisman

I have to agree that this is likely to be the case. Teamwork between the P51D and the Spit IX should work well though. Happy landings, Talisman

Well said :thumbup: Happy landings, Talisman

Very much agree. Single install, Normandy map and Spitfire plus all other WWII aircraft. I hope very much that we can all come together as a community on a single one track installation to fly warbirds. Otherwise we will have an unwanted extended period of disjointed activity/lack of activity, that will further put off the potential for an inclusive customer base. I will not mess about with multiple installations. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Just found this: To support the D-Day invasion the Royal Air Force formed the 2nd Tactical Air Force, which among other aircraft contained 18 squadrons of Hawker Typhoons. During the first five days of June 1944, the Typhoons put out of action all but one of the coastal radar installations on the Normandy coast. On D-Day itself, June 6, 1944, the nearest German armored formation to the invasion beaches—the 21st Panzer Division—was attacked continuously by Typhoons, suffering 26 destroyed or abandoned tanks. As a result, only six panzers and a handful of infantry made it near enough the coast to menace the Allied landings. Once the beachhead was secured, the Typhoon units were tasked with providing close air support to the British 2nd Army. While performing this job, Typhoons, in conjunction with Mitchel Light Bombers, obliterated the command center of Panzergruppe West, the headquarters which controlled all the German armored forces in Normandy. http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/the-hawker-typhoon-1a-1b-worst-raf-fighters-in-wwii/ Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Hawker Tempest Mk V is my dream aircraft for DCS :joystick: I second that wish big time. It is an aircraft that tends to get overlooked, which is a great shame. Happy landings, Talisman

We would need the historic high octane fuel used by the aircraft of the day. Happy landings, Talisman

Just as long as the possibility of getting something like 50 to 80 odd pilots on a WWII MP server will not be made difficult then that would be great. WWII in DCS has the opportunity to be massively popular if it starts attracting WWII pilot enthusiast from other titles. Happy landings, Talisman