rel4y

The first report deals with the development of the timed fuse while the second report is the final report before production which shows detailed pictures. www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/Flakraketen/R4M%20Orkan/Text/Zeitlinie/1945/Februar/Februar%201945.pdf www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/Flakraketen/R4M%20Orkan/Text/Zeitlinie/1945/Mearz/Mearz%201945.pdf

Hey, I dont wanna get into a meaningless fight here but let me rephrase what I said. I am pretty certain that maybe apart from some A models, of which only 22 were built and many were redesignated V prototypes, none of the Luftwaffe 109s had spade grips. Most certainly from B production onwards all Luftwaffe 109s only had KG 12/13s sticks. :thumbup: I would be very pleased if you could show me pictures of spade grip 109s apart from the swiss ones as I have never seen one and would be very interested.

Just a quick note, I am pretty sure that only the swiss export E models had the KG 11 spade grip, but none of the Luftwaffe versions.

The R4M rockets certainly had a timed fuse. It coupled the combustion chamber to the explosive charge via a small metal plate which was only perforated if the propellant burned at or above a specific threshold. This was important as rockets sometimes got stuck on the rail if the propellant burned improperly, which would have caused a rocket exploding on the wing rack and most definitely a loss of plane and pilot firing the rocket. If documentation is necessary I can provide detailed german reports about this mechanism. edit: added production sketch from Nov 1944

Ok, I think I see what you are talking about. Though below 160 kph IAS I stall after a few seconds and the nose drops. This depends on altitude and fuel load, I was using 100%. Cooler flaps are fully open and temps quickly rise above the sustainable levels. If I close one rad the engine overheats pretty quickly within 10 seconds and streams smoke. The real question is if the cooling capabilities of the rads are sufficient to cool the engine at WEP/MW50 while fully open at a certain TAS. Then it is important at what altitude this happened as the external temperature and air density are factors at well. I think olny Yo-Yo can tell us these params. Edit: In the vid, please enable Ctrl + Z and show the TAS.

Well, thats why I am asking at what speed this occurs and what the coolant temps are... Because if you dont know these two basic params then what is this complaint based on? Female intuition?

Well if your coolant temps are ok you wont blow the engine. If the coolant flaps open fully open you will have immense cooling capabilites, but also immense drag. That is why the engineers limited the cooling flap opening to 220 mm at one point, because it was creating excessive drag without being necessary. If the coolant overheats, evaporation enthalpy will keep it steady for some limited amount of time while excess vapor which can not be recondensated in the vapor trap is being released by an overpressure valve. Until the coolant amount has decreased so far that sufficient cooling is not possible anymore, one hopefully has noticed the steady stream of vapor exiting the engine. Have you looked at TAS via pressing Ctrl + Z twice? Am I understanding your Problem correctly?

By running without WEP, do you mean running without MW50 at 1.8 ata? I have noticed there is a random generator at work, sometimes the engine breaks after 10 s sometimes after 2 minutes. If youre coolant overheats it will blow instantly though. Try manually shutting the rads and climbing steeply and you will encounter this easily as soon as the coolant reaches critical temps. On the other hand one rad is enough to provide cooling at full power, if you use the shutoff valve to close one rad they will open a bit wider and you can pretty much still fly full power at level depending on outside temps of course. The rads where a bit oversized.

Sorry I actually copied the wrong filename.. You need "Pilot_BF109.dds". You will also need "pilot_BF109_FP1.dds" from ...\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\Bf-109K-4\Cockpit\Textures. Actually the second one is the more important one as it is in cockpit, the first one should be the external view.

Haha first thing I did as well. ;) Go to ...\DCS World\CoreMods\WWII Units\Bf-109K-4\Textures and copy Pilot_BF109.dds You will also need "pilot_BF109_FP1.dds" from ...\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\Bf-109K-4\Cockpit\Textures. Germany is getting increasingly "banana repuplicy" anyway, no need to support such idiotic laws especially as they are not distinct in this regard. One could argue the liveries including symbols are art etc.

The guy claims he zoomed from the ground to 8000 ft, reversed 180°, caught two Me 262s 4000ft below him at 600 mph indicated and then stayed on them for 15 mins at 1000 ft. Thats ridiculous. Try diving from 8000 ft in a 90° nose down attitude and I guarantee you there is no way to get even close to 600 IAS before you crash into the ground and the guy was definitely not going max level speed after a zoom climb to 8000 ft and certainly wasnt diving 8k in a vertical dive. Also the 51 will not show 600 indicated at some significantly lower speed due to compressibility. Absolutely not. Maybe the instrument or pitot was defect/ iced, doesnt explain the next mystery though. The Me 262 is aerodynamically cleaner, faster accelerating at high speed than the 51 and can sustain level speeds of around 525 mph at 4000 ft, if its in an 30° dive it will go much faster. The guy claims to have stayed in gunrange behind two diving Me 262 for 15 mins... After the initial 4k feet dive he could not possibly have been much faster than 500 mph, thats not even level speed of the 262s and they were supposedly 30° diving, yet he caught them. Even if he somehow ended up 800 yards behind them without speed advantage, after a 15 min chase the 262s would be way out of his sight. If he pushed his prop to 67", 74" or even 80" wouldnt have made any difference whatsoever. I still call it BS, but whatever.

Thanks Sith! One of the graphs was apparantly already overwritten with some crap, but I also posted the link to the full test at the very bottom. :)

Here it is, Sith. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=170388

Well, then how did he maintain compressibility for 15 min at 1000 ft? As I said either completely inexperienced pilot or a nice story. He certainly did not follow two Me 262s out of a 30° dive with jets on for 15 min and noone gained an inch. Complete bs.

Any info if rudder authority is being looked at as well? I posted a report in the bugs section a while ago. I have the fear that out of beta somehow sounds like carved in stone. :unsure:

I havent seen a picture yet, but in this document the switches and location, also the salvo modes are being described. [ame=http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/Flakraketen/R4M%20Orkan/Text/R4%20M-Anlage%20Abschussgereat/R4M%20Anlage%20%20Abschussgereat.pdf]www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/Flakraketen/R4M%20Orkan/Text/R4%20M-Anlage%20Abschussgereat/R4M%20Anlage%20%20Abschussgereat.pdf[/ame]

This pilot report obviously is completely unrealistic as it defies all laws of physics.. Either the pilot was inexperienced and saw a ghost or he wanted to tell a nice story. Either way 600 mph indicated will be an even higher TAS. To maintain this kind of speed at 1000 - 8000 ft he would need to dive at an angle of at least 50° pitch down. Some middle school maths and physics show you why 600 IAS is impossible. Lets be conservative and say TAS was 620 mph. v * t = s 620 mph = 277 m/s 15 min = 900 s 277 m/s * 900 s = 249300 m ~ 250 km sin alpha * s = h sin 50° * 250 km = 191.51 km ~ 190 km So in 15 min of flight at 600 mph IAS he would have to loose roughly 190 km of altitude = 118 miles = 623360 ft. So the dood apparently was a satellite. Complete bs.

I dont think there are any pictures, afaik only the prototype models had all the wirings for the BR 21 modification installed from factory. These include the activation/ selection wiring and switch (Fl. 32346-3) for the Wrf. Gr. 21/ R4M rockets (below the gear indicator), as well as the explosive charge wiring and switch for the emergency detachment of the BR 21 tubes (below the MW50 switch in DCS, in reality most likely above the MW50 switch). If the BR 21 mod was actually used on K-4s is speculative, but all the prerequisites were in place for very early models. Later production models definitely had the explosive charge switch (Fl. 32345-2) and wiring removed. The Wrf. Gr. 21 Rüstsatz afaik was canceled for the K-4, while e.g. for the G-10 there apparently is an official designation in form of Rüstsatz VII. It may have been the same for the K-4 initially.

A K just has a different prop and a crapy one at that, that doesnt make any sense.. The D model including prop type has much more documentation around. I am saying we currently have most likely an Iwo Jima model externally with a normal type FM. Just based on documentaion available thats the best guess.

The other question is actually if in the flight model the equipment is even modeled. Afaik the FM is based on some sort of weight distribution charts and I highly doubt there was one for an Uncle Dog PTO version available given the exotic nature of the version. 3D model is one thing, flight model another really. Maybe the IFF is included, maybe not.

Uh Oh.. You have just triggered the allied sleeper cells.. :lol:

So fixing a bug in coding of the Mission Editor which displayed incorrect MW50 volume is adjusting performance? The Mustang has had HVAR rockets since forever and the also out of beta 190 had what exactly till the last patch? Right... What a huge fuzz about nothing. If you want to speed up things, how about collecting info and data on the things you want added so bad to make EDs life easier? Ed is working on so many fronts, especially on stuff we get upgraded for free, that a few months patience is not really a tall order. The german birds are missing ammo types as well and even have currently mislabled ones, so the Mustang is not alone in these regards.

Got it to work! Thanks for the tip, working just as before and no integrity check problems whatsoever. So much for sensible restrictions via integrity check... :doh:

Sorry, but this is nonsense. It takes two lines of code to hard limit the FOV settings. I even decreased my max FOV for convenience, but my main point is the default FOV. I dont "feel" there is no advantage, there is objectively no advantage whatsoever limiting my FOV to a smaller angle than ED choose for me. And this is not a mod this is basic FOV adjustment which should be for everyone free to choose in a valid envelope. What if I dont want the standard settings ED has chosen for me? Well I can change it in a valid envelope, thats how it works for graphics settings, for keybinds, etc. So why shouldnt it be possible for another basic adjustment such as FOV? This ridiculous standard 140° setting looks rather psychedelic and could probably be considered more of an unfair advantage than changing it to a more reasonable angle. Then there is the problem with multi monitor setups, they certainly need to adjust their FOV and are now basically cut off from the multiplayer community by integrity checks. How is that a logical thing to do? Solution: Just hard limit the envelope ED deems valid dependng on single/multi monitor setup and leave the rest to personal preference.

I find this counterproductive as well, as I have set my zoom levels (30 to 105) for each aircraft individually and the standard zoom levels are awful. I dont gain any unfair benefit from changing the values, so I dont see why it is even picked up by the integrity check. Please fix this ED!