Cripple

Good News! I have the "Spitfire Room" back in commission and she's back in situ (see pics). I've also wired up the switches on the dash and the main switch bank (which is complete - see pics). Happy face! :D (Oh, and I managed to get the flaps control working. That was fun... screwed a mini push-switch in to the rear, then whittled down a bit of down until it was the right length to push the switch when the lever was flipped down. Lots of fiddly work, but really satisfying now it works.)

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I was envisioning a) a slightly longer mission time (with the added element of not knowing if/when Jerry would be bouncing you), and b) the added complexity of having to find the things you were supposed to be supporting - preferably before they get bounced by said Jerry. You know, like it was In Real Life (IRL). I'll link an interesting article on the development of the Mustang, that also talks about escort duties. The relevant section to this discussion is on page 24 of the document. Seemingly there were two types of escort mission: Target Support - which is the escort of the bomber by the fighter only over the target area "for about 15 minutes" (i.e. the game length envisioned by the OP), and Penetration Support - Long-range escort along the entire bomber path. In this the escorts and bombers met up a considerable distance from the target, and flew together (albeit with the faster fighters flying a "weaving pattern". For the latter type of bomber support to be *simulated* (remember we a playing a simulation here, folks), with the attendant pilot fatigue and fuel consumption risks, a substantially longer in-game mission time would be required. (Aircraft, IRL, do not pop in to existence near their target. Being a pilot would be a lot easier if they did. :megalol:) http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA330888

Short version: by the time the Allies invaded Occupied France, the Luftwaffe was a) short on planes, and b) short on trained pilots. Yup? Thanks for the collation of the information, and I wasn't aware that either of those points were ever under dispute. Certainly every source I've read, including the accounts of both Allied and Luftwaffe pilots, support this.

Ground start - both sides. Allies have to climb rapidly and vector to intercept their bombers, then escort. Axis have to climb to an altitude of the their choice (probably above the bombers, eh?), whilst vectoring to intercept - then engage. You know, navigation and all that. :thumbup: If both sides are given the altitude, flight path, and cruising speed of the bombers ("blah, blah... radar says this... blah blah" then the intercepts should be relatively easy to work out before take off.

I like the fact we are getting the earlier Mark IX tbh. Not too keen on the (over) emphasis on late-war aircraft (particularly as it's a bit of an Allied steam-roller...), and like the idea of mid-war scenarios being developed. Oh, and I also prefer the aesthetics of the mid-war cockpit and canopy. :)

Were there many helicopters in Normandy, circa '44? :music_whistling: (I agree with Klem. Nice piccies though.)

Thanks for sharing. A nice wee summary of the detective work we've all been doing. :)

This is from the 1937 edition ('39 reprint) of AP1081, The RAF Pocket Book, p42 (see pic): Ac, Beer, Charlie, Don, Edward, Freddie, George, Harry, Ink, Johnnie, King, London, Monkey, Nuts, Orange, Pip, Queen, Robert, Sugar, Toc, Uncle, Vic, William, X-ray, Yorker, Zebra However, I have some recollection that it was modified slightly mid-war... maybe 1942? (Apologies for the patchy info. I was flooded and most of my WW2 books are moved safely out of the way until repairs are completed...)

Has anyone highlighted that the phonetic alphabets are very different pre-NATO? A wee bit of google-fu throws up a nice wee collection of secondary sources for 40s ATC. (Short version seems to be: lights/flares for take off, lights/flares and radio for landing). The Isle of Man site also talks about the amusingly named "Darky" procedure: "This was an ingenious procedure that allowed a pilot of an aircraft in distress, whose radio operator may have been killed or injured, to talk directly to Flying Control at the nearest airfield. It operated by H/F R/T on a fixed frequency of 6440 Khz and transmitter powers were deliberately low to reduce range to around ten miles. For example, a pilot requiring assistance would transmit 'Hello Darky, Hello Darky, Hello Darky, this is Koska Freddy, Koska Freddy, over'. If Jurby Flying Control heard the call they would reply 'Hello Koska Freddy, this is Jurby, this is Jurby, over' Once two way communications were established assistance could be offered to home the aircraft to the visual circuit for landing." http://www.island-images.co.uk/ATC/zRon1940s/z1940s.html and http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/512941-early-atc-wwii.html

:megalol: (You've been here before, haven't you? :music_whistling:)

Is the Flight Model for the pigeon done yet? :lol:

We just need a head like this... [ame] [/ame]

Were the two mutually exclusive? IIRC, RAF fighter pilots were vectored (via voice comms) from ground control to intercept enemy aircraft. From a wartime RAF perspective, if you are after ATC procedures then AP3024 might be what you are looking for. I don't have a copy of that volume myself though, sorry. Let me check what I do have though...

Are you including ground-to-air in this request? (I am assuming the devs are already familiar with the Dowding System?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowding_system

"Two weeks..." :P

V nice!

Can't wait to see that painted... :)

Oooooooo! You big tease...;)

Another wee update. Pottering along with the controls and side panels. Here's a wee WIP pic (the bolts are where the trim wheels will be). Maybe you can spot my source of purloined mild steel? :P The square holes are a bit of a bugger to cut out. There's only so much I can do with my snips, then it's back to filing. I'm using a fairly heavy grade of steel too as the (period) switches have a lovely heavy feel to them - not so much a "click" as a "cl-UNK"! Can't wait to interface them in to the sim... :)

^^ Well put.

3016 wasn't it? :P @Bart - thanks for that link :)

Nope. I wait for the written info in the newsletter, personally. Wasn't anything in the last one, if memory serves. As for the validity of the poll... it's certainly no more futile than the usual wrangling over whether the X-Fighter-44 had green spots or purple spots painted over the wings. :P People just seem to want a bits of heads-up as to what's happening, and to air their own personal POV. Both of which seem pretty harmless.

I concur. The WW2 element of the game is a bit dead in the water (or air...) without suitable units to shoot at. Once we have AI bombers to intercept/escort and ground units to suppress, perhaps this over-emphasis on which plan is "best" at short-range dogfighting will quieten down a wee bit. ED et al do seem to have been rather keen at pushing the airframes rather than the appropriate content, however the recent releases of the Nevada map and the add-on missions for their star aircraft seems to be a step in the right direction.

Am indeed! :D

Build a sim-pit while you are waiting? Certainly fills the time... :P